Destroids...

[Seto Kaiba]

Ah, but are their respective timelines applicable to the Destroids and Variable Fighters under discussion? There's no doubt that Misty Klaus is a capable pilot in her respective timeline, but is she equally capable in Aegis Focker's timeline? Are either as capable in the M0 or MF timelines?

Now that's just the worst kind of hair-splitting... but yes, both Aegis Focker and Misty Klaus are relevant to the discussion of the (perceived) disparity in difficulty between destroid and variable fighter training, if only because we know how long both of them trained to be able to operate variable fighters in combat competently prior to being assigned to a combat zone. In the case of Misty Klaus, there's little in the way of doubt that she'd be every bit as capable in the main continuity as she is in the parallel world continuity, as she's supposed to be a top Meltrandi ace pilot (ala Milia). Given his years of training, one would suspect Aegis Focker would be at least reasonably capable in the parallel world continuity as well.

If we want to talk strict relevance to destroids themselves, the odds that Misty would operate a destroid at some point in her U.N. Spacy career are much better, since in the parallel world continuity leading up to Macross II: Lovers Again, the U.N. Spacy never abandoned destroids like it did in the main continuity. The first ship she was assigned to even had a substantial complement of Tomahawks to execute the Daedalus attack with.

The Cheyenne had crappy weapons, but the wheels and jet assisted jumps made it better than the later Destroids.

And why, then, would that necessitate re-using a fifty year old design when those same features could just as easily be added to the Space War 1-era designs?

[VF5SS]

And why, then, would that necessitate re-using a fifty year old design when those same features could just as easily be added to the Space War 1-era designs?

Because they already have a CG model of the Cheyenne.

[Seto Kaiba]

Because they already have a CG model of the Cheyenne.

Granted... but somehow I don't think that was part of the New U.N. Spacy's rationale.

[Bri]

Insofar as the difficulty of training and how helpful prior experience operating an aircraft is/was, we have to remember that for every Hikaru Ichijo or Shin Kudo, there's a Misty Klaus or a Milia Jenius... someone who, despite having almost certainly never set foot in the cockpit of a plane before, picks up the basics of a VF's operation in an extremely short span of time and is able to operate one in combat not long after and not embarrass themselves too badly. (Other such likely individuals include Maximilian Jenius, Hayao Kakizaki, Sheryl Nome, poss. Mylene Jenius)

Can we simply compare pilots from different eras? I'm under the impression that valks in the era of MF are far easier to pilot then SW I era mecha. Pilots are younger ( MFs high schooler pilots) and iirc the VF-25 lowers the G-forces the pilot is exposed to in the cockpit, removing most of the physical requirement for a pilot (points at the shotacon pilot). Comments were made that the NUNS relies on poorly trained pilots for it's VF-171s which suggests the mainstay fighter is easy to handle.

Compare that to the launch ceremony in 2009 where Focker announces the VF-1 to be the latest and newest fighter. Given the small compliment aboard the SDF-1 we can assume that all original pilots were handpicked veterans from the worlds airforces. Come to think of it, the artrition of on the civilian turned VF-1 pilots during the return of the SDF-1 to earth must have been horrible (unless they were world class areobatics pilots like Hikaru or freaks of nature like Max)

[RedWolf]

Granted... but somehow I don't think that was part of the New U.N. Spacy's rationale.

Well they could've done worse. There's City 7's bazooka weilding Patroid.

[VF5SS]

Granted... but somehow I don't think that was part of the New U.N. Spacy's rationale.

UN Spacy isn't real.

[Killer Robot]

And why, then, would that necessitate re-using a fifty year old design when those same features could just as easily be added to the Space War 1-era designs?

This is the thing I wonder with all the grumbling over the new Cheyenne II. Why would using destroids based on 2009 models be so much better than destroids based on 2008 models? Especially when the 2008 models were minor variants on one that was rolled out in 2007? Whether the 04 frame and its assorted variants were deployed before or after the 03 is largely irrelevant, since their development and deployment were both highly contemporary. Further, in times of rapid technological development, especially in wartime, lots of designs come up at once and the last to be built isn't always what will most shape future development.

The original Cheyenne being cheaper and quicker to make doesn't mean it was some lesser design either since those were apparently due to its smaller size and conventional power plant: the first might have not been a big disadvantage in later roles, and the second is a fundamentally correctable one for future designs - on a destroid that sort of switch doesn't have the sweeping changes and complexity that the same would on a variable fighter. Again, we haven't seen the whole picture for any of these, and it's not far-fetched that its basic design just proved more reliable and extensible when it came time to work on a new generation.

All in all, why would it be unreasonable for post-SW1 Destroid designers to look at the Cheyenne rather than the Tomahawk, etc. for future designs? We're not comparing two generations of mecha, but rather contemporary models. It seems to me that available data wouldn't contradict either direction, so really there's no technical reason to complain about which direction the designers chose.

[sketchley]

Because they already have a CG model of the Cheyenne.

Actually... only the legs are the same (even then, the Cheyenne II comes across as having more stylized legs). The rest? It would require new modelling (hip machine gun is reversed, torso is different, head different, radar pod different, shoulders different, forearms different, etc., etc.)

The "reusing a CG model" arguement holds as much water as the VF-25 and the VF-27 being the same - as they also share the same transformation, and torso/hip area.

[VF5SS]

So why did they re-use the VF-0's missiles for the VF-171?

[Seto Kaiba]

Can we simply compare pilots from different eras? I'm under the impression that valks in the era of MF are far easier to pilot then SW I era mecha.

Yeah, I think we can probably get away with it. True, there is technology out there that makes VFs somewhat easier to operate and reduces the strain on the pilots in Macross Frontier. However, the technology in question (the Inertia Store Converter and EX-Gear) is new, and the VF-25 is the first (known) variable fighter to use them. The VF-171 has neither system, and the upgraded EX model adds only the EX-Gear. Since the overwhelming majority of VFs out there, even in 2059, don't use fancy toys like that to make the pilot's workload easier, I think we can make comparisons with relative safety.

Whether we can say the same between the various models of destroid is another matter entirely, since we never really see any named character do anything with the Cheyenne models, and the Konig Monster is not really a proper destroid anymore. One would imagine the interface remained fairly simple, and probably less complicated than the VFs of the day... at least prior to the introduction of EX-Gear. Outside of Super Dimension Fortress Macross, I think the only other time we see the interior of a destroid's cockpit is in Macross II: Lovers Again, when we briefly see inside a Defender EX's cockpit as the ground defenses prepare to open fire, and we don't really get the full view there, just the viewscreen and part of the pilot's chair.

Comments were made that the NUNS relies on poorly trained pilots for it's VF-171s which suggests the mainstay fighter is easy to handle.

If memory serves, the VF-171 was selected for its versatility and ease of operation. Pilot training was supposedly cut back due to the increasing emphasis on unmanned combat units (AIF-7S Ghost). Even so, the Frontier fleet still had a number of reasonably effective pilots even before they got a technological leg-up on the Vajra. They don't get much in the way of screen time because, of course, the story is about the mercenaries from SMS. If they were cutting training back on the VF pilots, odds are they were reducing the training for destroid operators of that era too, since the general expectation seems to have been that they could bog the enemy down indefinitely and well away from the ship with the legions of semi-expendable Ghosts.

Compare that to the launch ceremony in 2009 where Focker announces the VF-1 to be the latest and newest fighter. Given the small compliment aboard the SDF-1 we can assume that all original pilots were handpicked veterans from the worlds airforces. Come to think of it, the artrition of on the civilian turned VF-1 pilots during the return of the SDF-1 to earth must have been horrible (unless they were world class areobatics pilots like Hikaru or freaks of nature like Max)

All things considered, you're probably right in that the SDF-1 likely had the cream of the VF pilot crop... but that's to be expected if it's the flagship of the U.N. Spacy's fleet. The same could probably be said for the destroid pilots aboard the Daedalus too... as far as the attrition rate being horrible... hey, someone's gotta fly the brown ones, right?

Edited February 5, 2010 by Seto Kaiba

[sketchley]

So why did they re-use the VF-0's missiles for the VF-171?

What are we talking about? Isn't the topic the Cheyenne II?

[Graham]

So why did they re-use the VF-0's missiles for the VF-171?

To give a real life example about the longevity of certain missiles, the AIM-9 Sidewinder missile (with sucessive upgrades) has been in service with US forces continuously since 1956. That's 54 years in service.

So there's no reason why an upgraded version of the missiles seen on the VF-0 in Macross Zero in 2008 shouldn't still be in service in 2059.

Anyway, back to talking about Destroids.

Graham

[anime52k8]

To give a real life example about the longevity of certain missiles, the AIM-9 Sidewinder missile (with sucessive upgrades) has been in service with US forces continuously since 1956. That's 54 years in service.

So there's no reason why an upgraded version of the missiles seen on the VF-0 in Macross Zero in 2008 shouldn't still be in service in 2059.

Anyway, back to talking about Destroids.

Graham

except an AIM-9X of today looks considerably different from the AIM-9B that entered service in 1956

the idea that a missile would be introduced, taken out of service (replaced by the AMM-1) then 50 years latter reserfice looking absolutely identical is a little hard to believe.

The missile argument actually makes more sense as a justification for why the Cheyenne II is derived from a 50 year old mech. If the fundamental design works, no need to reinvent the wheel. Just build one incorporating better systems and weapons.

Edited February 5, 2010 by anime52k8

[Graham]

the idea that a missile would be introduced, taken out of service (replaced by the AMM-1) then 50 years latter reserfice looking absolutely identical is a little hard to believe.

You are just guessing that the Raytheon Bifors AIM-200A AMRAAM 2 used by the VF-0 was taken out of service and replaced by the AMM-1. We don't know that either way.

We do know that the VF-0 was a test-bed for more advanced systems than used by the VF-0. Could be that the AIM200A was the more advanced missile, but there was not time to but it into mass production by the start of Space War 1. Like much of Macross, there is just too much that has never been confirmed, revealed etc.

Again, it could be that the AIM-200A AMRAAM 2 has been in service all this time, just we have never seen it.

Certainly from at least the VF-11 onwards, most VFs have been shown with only internally carried missiles, rather than mounted on the wings. It is not until Macross Frontier that wing mounted missiles seem to have resurfaced. Again this doesn't mean they weren't used post-SW1, just we have not been shown them be used. Ther is a difference.

Also, the missile used in Frontier, while looking similar to the one used in VF-0 actually has a different designation according to the Macross Chronicles.

Macross Zero missile = Raytheon Bifors AIM-200A AMRAAM 2.

Macross Frontier Missile = L.A.I./AAMS-02A

Graham

[nexxstrait]

Certainly from at least the VF-11 onwards, most VFs have been shown with only internally carried missiles, rather than mounted on the wings. It is not until Macross Frontier that wing mounted missiles seem to have resurfaced. Again this doesn't mean they weren't used post-SW1, just we have not been shown them be used. Ther is a difference.

The cover of MPlus TIA shows a vast array of missiles, so wing-mounted were probably used (The drones in Plus did use them)

[Zinjo]

All things considered, you're probably right in that the SDF-1 likely had the cream of the VF pilot crop... but that's to be expected if it's the flagship of the U.N. Spacy's fleet. The same could probably be said for the destroid pilots aboard the Daedalus too... as far as the attrition rate being horrible... hey, someone's gotta fly the brown ones, right?

Would they though?

They'd have the cream of the "surviving" pilots as CAGs, WCs and Squadron Leaders. Vets of the UN wars for sure, but also keep in mind there was also a demand for seasoned pilots elsewhere on Spacy facilities world wide and on space installations.

I'd expect there to be a lot of highly trained rookies, possibly the best of their respective classes aboard the Macross lead by combat vetrans, not a ship load full of vets. That idea really doesn't make logical sense in a world that is expecting imminent attack by aliens.

The notion of "putting all your eggs in one basket" comes to mind...

[Uxi]

From Roy's dialog in Zero, I got the impression they were losing alot of their best pilots to the conflict.

[1/1 LowViz Lurker]

I think destroids would be easier to use simply because you are moving around slowly and not constantly having to aim while moving at high speed all the time.

The heroes in the anime do what they do because they simply can't be allowed to die. Max has intuition, milia is one of the best pilots of the zentradi, and hikaru was a acrobatic circus pilot before he ever decided to join up with the military to use his skill to kill aliens. Sure he never got shot at doing the stunts but he has developed skill through actual experience and not just developed that level of precision from the training given to him after joining up.

It would be like taking a trained martial artist and seeing how long he can last in a bar fight and saying how easy it is to control the human body as a weapon vs putting an ordinary guy with no fighting experience and ignoring that he got damaged way more badly due to lack of preparation.

Let's just say that using aces and stunt pilots is a bad example to show how easy a valk is compared to destroids. Luke Skywalker is not typical of an ordinary pilot in star wars universe in flying x-wing since he has the force, right? So in macross hikaru who treats flying as his single dream, is not typical of the ordinary cannon fodder brownie.

You can't say: "but look how easy hikaru manages to learn!" as if that is a good example of the average person.

But the bottom line: destroids are not flying in the air while trying to shoot other flying aliens around them. They are shooting from a still position at moving targets, while not moving themselves most of the time. (due to being slow bulky machines)

Shoot while standing still at a moving target. Now go shoot while you move, at moving targets. Which is easier?

You see valkyries strafing around in gerwalk mode and changing to battroid mode halfway through a fight and then to fighter mode to make a quick escape to avoid missiles swarms all the time in macross. That just requires more skill than not having to do that. It's not just moving the vehicles to do mundane things, it's knowing how to utilise ALL 3 modes while in combat as shown in macross zero when roy has to get shin out of the "fighter mode only" mindset.

On top of just using them, knowing:

1. When to use them,

2. training yourself how to use them EFFECTIVELY,

and

3. how to combine all 3 modes within a single battle instead of just using 1 mode for 1 role and sticking to that one mode.

Ie using all 3 modes depending on how the enemy chooses to fight you (assuming you both have VF capability) and tactically mixing the modes to confuse your opponent. (the dogfight between shin and nora is a classic example: the gerwalk mode gave him just the right amount of time to shoot sideways, which fighter mode lacked the ability to do)

Yeah ok ok it gets easier to know how to drive one as technology improves. But the concept of having more options requires more thought. With a destroid you have less options to think about because the thing just isn't able to move around fast. There are no sudden sharp changes in speed that throw timing off. Don't tell me that dodging a microsmissiles swarm in fighter mode is just autopilot or something like that. It's elite skill.

All the destroid pilot and reguld pilot has to worry about is being behind something on the ground (like a building or something) so that the missiles hit something else and blow up harmlessly because there isn't a clear path between itself and the missiles. This is actually why max did so well against milia's Qrau in the SDFM tv series by purposely choosing a battle environment in a confined space that made it hard for her space-use robot (designed to fight in open spaces), to use her best attacks (spraying the area with guided missiles) You can't do that if they blow up in your face or there is lots of places for a smaller target to seek cover can you? Her strength became her weakness and since her powered suit is larger than a valk, she became an easier target.

Destroids not being useful for space would make them less useful than valks but imo they would provide great defence inside the ship if giants ever managed to get inside. The valks can do everything they can AND fly, but your best pilots should be the guys out there flying the fast robots which have to scramble and get from place to place at high speeds, not wasting their talents and skills piloting slower robots which stand on one spot and defend against ground robots or giants. Even though destroids are less useful, macross the tv series is really about people with limited resources using crazy unconventional ideas to achieve a goal without an enemy being able to have planned for in advance. That's why the deadalus attack worked because if the enemy expected something like it, there would be no element of surprise would there?

I can still see destroids being useful on the condition that being seriously outnumbered meant a high probability of giant aliens being able to enter into the lone ship and try to take it from the inside for whatever reason. You want more guns and heavy weapons than speed in a confined space. Before the super and strike packs valks look to me to have lacked enough weapons. Having a bunch of cheap destroids with easy to use controls that are less complex to repair and require less parts has got to count for something in times of limited resources and lack of time before you can develop something more appropriate.

If I wasn't a hero pilot, and assuming I was lazy and had limited memory because I was dropped as a baby, the destroid would be my robot of choice. Yeah it's more slow than a valk, but you don't want to fly around in a crowded environment and risk smashing into stuff, so to me the slow speed becomes less an issue if your only job is defending, not trying to chase something that is constantly sldiing around in the open space.

Just because the tv series' focus is on the heroes overcoming enemy aces, (hikaru defeating kamjin, roy being bested by females, max defeating his girlfriend etc) that doesn't mean enemy cannon fodders weren't also being shot down by destroids. It just means that future macross shows where humans are not up against superior numbers of alien will tend to not show defensive-type battles as much as "flying around in the open" battles with missiles spewing all over the place; with people having to fly at high speed and high precision to dodge it all. Maybe in future macross shows there is less need to show us the grunt mechas since none of the wars seems as epic and big as SW I in terms of humans fighting just to survive with an upper limit to how much supplies they can tap into. (at one point in the war you can see them resort to hand to hand fighting - you could argue that perhaps a low tech cheap substitute for less important tasks was something needed badly as there was only so much to go around)

The original tv series didn't just show us a space war but several ground ones that involved giant aliens roaming near cities with tiny human people. Ground-use robots against giants (that cannot fly around) would have sufficed at that point.

Edited February 20, 2010 by 1/1 LowViz Lurker

[Uxi]

Most of the improvements given to Valkyries aren't known to have been incorporated into Destroids. Most logical developments for destroid survivability would be first energy conversion armor, then ballistic shields that we see as early as VF-11, then Pinpoint Barrier systems. Hell just look at the evolution of GBP to VF-11 Protect Armor to the Armored Pack VF-25... take out the transformation mechanisms, wings, fusion engines (maybe keep but would it really hurt to give it the thrust of an advanced Battroid?) and that's how Destroid development should roughly look with the goodies like PPB systems...

[JB0]

Most of the improvements given to Valkyries aren't known to have been incorporated into Destroids. Most logical developments for destroid survivability would be first energy conversion armor, then ballistic shields that we see as early as VF-11, then Pinpoint Barrier systems. Hell just look at the evolution of GBP to VF-11 Protect Armor to the Armored Pack VF-25... take out the transformation mechanisms, wings, fusion engines (maybe keep but would it really hurt to give it the thrust of an advanced Battroid?) and that's how Destroid development should roughly look with the goodies like PPB systems...

Actually, the advanced fusion engine is the FIRST thing I'd add to the destroids.

Remember, the VF-1 has far more raw power than the destroids. Orders of magnitude more.

If we assume the specs at the Compendium are accurate and complete(I have my doubts about the destroids because they weren't star mechs, and, well, see below)...

The Monster has about 8 Megawatts of power(converting horsepower to watts), and the beefiest generators of all the destroids.

The VF-1 has 650 megawatts at it's command. That's EIGHTY-ONE times more power.

So yeah... new generators all around, then use all that surplus power to reinforce them with energy conversion armor and pin-point barriers.

From there, it depends on design goal.

The anti-aircraft Defenders, I'd upgrade the guns above all else. Rail guns or particle weapons, depending on effectiveness.

Probably rail guns, given the way tech's gone so far in Macross. Freed from the need to pack propellant, they can carry more ammo. And the rail gun will lob it faster, so they're more effective at longer ranges.

Maneuverability isn't a major concern for this usage model. Stability and accuracy are, however, and the extra mass of an armor upgrade would help keep things steady as well as boosting durability(and the Defenders are the vast majority of on-screen Destroid casualties).

Also possible: gravity controllers... to weigh the machines down while firing.

The close-combat Spartan I'd give more powerful and more responsive motors for a faster, more maneuverable mech that can hit harder. And with these newer better motors, we can make those fists truly massive. If they aren't packing the raw power of an atomic explosion into every punch, there's room for improvement.

Maybe even pack a short-range particle emitter in there. Nothing terribly powerful or well-focused, but... smash the armor with the fists, then unload a particle shotgun through the crack at point-blank range.

The Tomahawk? It's the Macross equivalent of a main battle tank. Even designated as a "main battle robot". Heavily-armed and heavily-armored, but not to the degree that mobility is hindered and it's reduced to a really fancy artillery piece(not that that's a BAD thing, you Monster fans can put the knives down please?).

It's the biggest, baddest mech you can field while still wading into the front lines kicking ass and taking names. That says two things to me. Bigger guns, thicker armor.

Upgrade the motors to compensate for the increased weight, but not to the same degree as the Spartan. Tomahawk pilots don't need to be jump-kicking anyone.

Under consideration: limited transformation, along the same lines as the Cheyenne. Used mainly to get somewhere fast on ideal terrain, then swap back to destroid mode and start blasting things.

Don't compromise armor integrity for a fancy tank-to-robot-and-back transformation. Keep it simple.

The Monster's already taken care of, really. Hi, VB-6 König Monster.

It's also the one that loses the least if it's made transformable, since the original is so awkward to move(can't even walk on uneven surfaces reliably).

...

On the other hand, it's highest-yield cannon shells DO require it to be able to survive uncomfortably close to a reaction weapon detonation, so the extra chinks in the armor MIGHT be considered undesirable. But that's not it's most common mode of operation, and I assume that energy-converting armor can compensate(or they never would've built the VB-6 in the first place).

That's my two cents, anyways.

Edited February 21, 2010 by JB0

[1/1 LowViz Lurker]

So far in macross human have encountered:

giant humanoid beings that can't repair things

elves

giant inbit style creatures

But if humans were to be attacked by something new like another race of intelligent beings similar to us, I wonder what impact that would have on the technology used?

Would we go to smaller mechs like the characters in genesis climber mospeada so they be harder to hit and can fight in smaller space easier?

Have smaller versions of the destroids which are more like the valkyries and don't have built in weapons but weapon packs (ie vf-25?

Perhaps larger versions of the ex-gear which is something closer to the size of a powerloader from aliens or the mechs in bubble gum crisis?

Personally I think the most interesting thing would be if humans had another war similar to the war they had on earth before the alien ship arrived but this time in space. (ie gundam) There may be some kind of technology that is too dangerous and similar to the islanders in macross zero you have anti un and un spacy trying to control it for themselves, and an alien race that fights both of them off out of fear it will be exploited. (something that feeds off the energies generated by the mixed races and possibly mind controlled by the last aliens races that had visited but misused the technology - forcing us to have to destroy it)

Enter a new macros sspin-off series featuring the heroic transforming destroids which go in first and get slaughtered because they were too bulky. This then results in a competition between two companies to create a smaller mech:

1. upgraded EX-gear with agility (like the yf-21 which is sleeker and more sophistacted, may be more stealthy)

2. small destroids with heavy weapons and just-enough armour (the underdog which wins the contract because it looks safer)

Smal destroids would be like the legioss with mini versions of the gunpod, a transforming ability, but unlike valkyries (and depsite being smaller than them) the armour is thicker. (ie a mini destroid) However since they can hover and transform they retain a respectable speed unlike the destroids which walk like they are glued to the ground. It would be closer to a valk with GBP armour but just more compact.

Edited February 21, 2010 by 1/1 LowViz Lurker

[Uxi]

How long until some of these human fleets start fighting each other? The Varauta were a unique case, obviously, but eventually Eden could have beef with another colony. The closest we've seen is Galaxy versus Frontier, but Galaxy was largely using the Vajra as proxy. Full blown warfare between two client/member states, if not a full civil war in NUNS?

As far as the destroids themselves...

Monster has a clear path through the Koenig. The Macross II variation seems mostly cosmetic differences.

Phalanx derivation... Macross II Phalanx upgrade was always one of my favorite destroids. Gets that chin gun with a bunch of thrusters on the back... but I'd actually see the Defender and Phalanx merging into an Aegis system. One or two big missile pods with long range missiles. Eventually the 3rd generation would completely merge them and move entirely towards micro-missiles in the 2040s (just like all the valkyries are doing). Some could be optimized towards ABM capability while others would pack different load outs, including possibility of reaction weapons.

Tomahawk:

2020s gets a gun or two like the Stampede? General improvements in armor and agility. Call it Tomahawk II

2040's Tomahawk derivation gets a permanently mounted gunpod like the buster from the Protect Armor... Tomahawk III? Ballistic Shield on the other arm, probably with a hand. A few dozen advanced micro-missiles.

2060's should see something like the VF-27's BGP-01β 55mm particle beam cannon, probably permanently mounted on the arm (if not the entire arm itself). PPB and Ballistic shield with PPB melee weapon. battle axe?

[1/1 LowViz Lurker]

I think a good melee weapon would be a mech hand with a knuckle duster. hehe.

[1/1 LowViz Lurker]

an armored version of this

simple and effective close range weapon. Punch, then stab them in the side of the neck with the other hand to finish them off. You get pin point barrier glowy bits on the knuckles to protect the hand from damage, and anti-armour blade to pierce the sensitive areas which require some level of accuracy and speed. Not a main weapon, but perhaps something to back you up when your other gun is reloading or jammed or something.

This way the hand is small enough to properly grip all kind of weapons, not fat and chunky like the spartan ones.

Edited February 21, 2010 by 1/1 LowViz Lurker

[miles316]

I one was going to replace the Destroids Just develop a Meltran Combat armored suit (I forget the Name) adapt it for a Miclon use. It has a Large Zentradi size Cavity inside though I don't know if the Pilots actually uses their arms and legs to move the Machines limbs (Iron Man)or if it is just arm and leg movement being interpited by a computer (Full Metal Panic).

They could use the Cavity were the Maclon usually resides for extra generators, ammunition, and propellant.

I think you could even pack people in their for commando raids using the suits speed and fire power to fight its way in to a enemy base and discharge them at the target.

[Uxi]

Yeah sounds like Starship Troopers. There would still be a role for "tanks" aka Destroids with Valkyrie-scale weaponry but regular human infantry could look alot like Zentran infantry.

[Zinjo]

I think destroids would be easier to use simply because you are moving around slowly and not constantly having to aim while moving at high speed all the time.

The heroes in the anime do what they do because they simply can't be allowed to die. Max has intuition, milia is one of the best pilots of the zentradi, and hikaru was a acrobatic circus pilot before he ever decided to join up with the military to use his skill to kill aliens. Sure he never got shot at doing the stunts but he has developed skill through actual experience and not just developed that level of precision from the training given to him after joining up.

It would be like taking a trained martial artist and seeing how long he can last in a bar fight and saying how easy it is to control the human body as a weapon vs putting an ordinary guy with no fighting experience and ignoring that he got damaged way more badly due to lack of preparation.

Let's just say that using aces and stunt pilots is a bad example to show how easy a valk is compared to destroids. Luke Skywalker is not typical of an ordinary pilot in star wars universe in flying x-wing since he has the force, right? So in macross hikaru who treats flying as his single dream, is not typical of the ordinary cannon fodder brownie.

You can't say: "but look how easy hikaru manages to learn!" as if that is a good example of the average person.

But the bottom line: destroids are not flying in the air while trying to shoot other flying aliens around them. They are shooting from a still position at moving targets, while not moving themselves most of the time. (due to being slow bulky machines)

Shoot while standing still at a moving target. Now go shoot while you move, at moving targets. Which is easier?

You see valkyries strafing around in gerwalk mode and changing to battroid mode halfway through a fight and then to fighter mode to make a quick escape to avoid missiles swarms all the time in macross. That just requires more skill than not having to do that. It's not just moving the vehicles to do mundane things, it's knowing how to utilise ALL 3 modes while in combat as shown in macross zero when roy has to get shin out of the "fighter mode only" mindset.

On top of just using them, knowing:

1. When to use them,

2. training yourself how to use them EFFECTIVELY,

and

3. how to combine all 3 modes within a single battle instead of just using 1 mode for 1 role and sticking to that one mode.

Ie using all 3 modes depending on how the enemy chooses to fight you (assuming you both have VF capability) and tactically mixing the modes to confuse your opponent. (the dogfight between shin and nora is a classic example: the gerwalk mode gave him just the right amount of time to shoot sideways, which fighter mode lacked the ability to do) .............................

Dude, I love ya, but you got some serious keyboard diarrhrea going on here....

[Zinjo]

I tend to agree with JBO.

Destroids are not hero mecha therefore not afforded much of a future in Macross publications. Many believed that destroids were totally discontinued after SW1, but lo and behold, we have Cheyenne IIs in Frontier, so IMO they are deployed differently in the Macross universe than as ship defenses for the Stellar Navy aka UNSpacy, like they were in SW1. Outside of the Deadalus attack they were largely ineffective as ship defenses or offensive units.

The destroid evolution would work something like this in "my" universe.

Generation 2:

= All Models:

- VF-1 generation fusion reactors

- Lighter Armor, but reinforced with ECA for better mobility

- Wheel assisted ground movement for the feet (ala Mac II destroids and the Cheyenne)

= Defender 2:

- Quad mounted GU-11 guns (proven very effective in fighter combat, eventhough ultimately deemed overpowered for the Valks)

- *Although, this series appears to have been ultimately replaced by the Cheyenne series, post SW1 improvements should not be ruled out.*

= Tomahawk 2:

- Railguns and DEWs in the arms

- Better integration of the missile launchers attached to the body (granted the design was heavily influenced by the modern tanks of the day).

= Spartan 2:

- Give the damn thing a Gu-11 gunpod! (essentially making it the ground equivalent of a battroid)

- Shrink the chest area to give it a smaller vertical profile.

= Phalanx:

- Discontinue the line. The same could be acheived through stationary launcher emplacements. It's largely redundant considering the amount missiles carried by other destroids. Couple that with it's lack of defensive armaments, it is a waste of resources that could be employed elsewhere.

= Monster:

- Start the VB-X program. The size of the weapons system could lend itself well as a Marine drop ship, then transform into some sort of artillery support platform.

Generation 3:

- Redesign of all chassis to take advantage of advanced PPB and ECA technologies as well as increasing the mobility of such units.

- Upgrades in Fusion powerplants

- Upgrades in weaponry and ordinance efficiencies.

- Upgrades in sensory and tracking technologies

And with each generation, improvements are made over the prior one. Culminating in mission specific "Weapons Packs" similar to how the Valks have evolved.

I like to believe the destroids went to the UN Marine and ground based Army units. Where ground warfare is much more common than in the Navy. Valks in Spacy serve a dual function, whereas in a MEU or Army application a lot more ground based slugfests would occur.

Edited February 22, 2010 by Zinjo

[JB0]

I actually ignored the Phalanx in my upgrade plan explicitly. It was a jury-rigged hack to begin with, and the missile cloud tactics makes it not that effective since it runs out of ammo rapidly.

The destroid evolution would work something like this in "my" universe.

Don't mind if I offer my thoughts, do you?

= Defender 2:

- Quad mounted GU-11 guns (proven very effective in fighter combat, eventhough ultimately deemed overpowered for the Valks)

- *Although, this series appears to have been ultimately replaced by the Cheyenne series, post SW1 improvements should not be ruled out.*

The GU-11 is lower caliber and almost certainly lower velocity than the Corvantes autocannons the original Defender uses. No way to set up a liquid-cooled barrel, so the GU-11 needs to restrict itself to lower power rounds.

It's also quite likely less accurate at long range, being designed for much closer combat than the Defender's autocannons.

You're actually downgrading the Defender here.

More importantly... the Cheyenne sucks! Defenders forever!

= Tomahawk 2:

- Railguns and DEWs in the arms

- Better integration of the missile launchers attached to the body (granted the design was heavily influenced by the modern tanks of the day).

I hadn't considered railgun arms. Hmm...

Ammo feed through will be complex if you don't greatly reduce articulation(a la the Defender), but I'd probably reduce the arm cannon articulation anyways to provide a more stable base for the big guns(recoil absorption).

= Spartan 2:

- Give the damn thing a Gu-11 gunpod! (essentially making it the ground equivalent of a battroid)

- Shrink the chest area to give it a smaller vertical profile.

You'd have to make the hands far more fragile for it to operate a GU-11, and the Spartan is designed primarily as a melee unit. Reducing it's melee effectiveness so that it can use the VF-1's gunpod makes it a poor man's Tomahawk... or even worse, a GBP-1 Valk with less missiles and no bail-out-and-run option.

I'd opt for upgrading the anti-aircraft laser turret on it's head instead(totally forgot that thing was there).

Maybe add one or two of ye olde head lasers into the arm. They're small, but they pack a reasonable punch.

Pulling the cockpit in is certainly a good idea. Especially since it's, well, the cockpit.

I'd forgotten how far out that sticks, and it's not well-protected.

And with each generation, improvements are made over the prior one. Culminating in mission specific "Weapons Packs" similar to how the Valks have evolved.

Arguably, the Destroids did it first. The Tomahawk, Phalanx, and Defender all share a common leg and hip assembly(yeah, yeah, Phalanx is a jury-rigged hack anyways).

I'd be hesitant to make them TOO versatile, though. They start losing the cost and durability advantages over a variable fighter of similar tech level as the modularity increases.

And then you're left trying to find a good reason to maintain the destroid line when you can just buy variable fighters and expansion packs for everyone.

The upper torsos of the Tomahawk and Defender show good role-oriented design. Tomahawk's is heavily-armored, while the Defender's is lighter and places the focus on sensor capabilities.

I'd keep that much the same as it is. A modular design instead of a jack-of-all-trade robot.

The big thing I'd do is try and get the Spartan onto the same platform. But the Tomahawk and Defender need stability more than maneuverability, while the Spartan is just the opposite.

...

Maybe common leg assemblies with snap-in modifications for the Spartan legs? Lighter armor or something... There's already modification in the existing MBR-04 family. The upper legs on the Phalanx and Tomahawk have cartridges attached that aren't on the Defender(though you can see the mounting points on the Defender).

How does this sound?

Presented for your approval, the United Nations Combined Forces 3rd Generation Destroid Upgrade Implementation Plan!

A common leg platform carrying the generator and locomotive hardware, designed to be "tuned" for the different roles.

Two torsos. Spartan III and Tomahawk III share a common torso, Defender III gets a lighter, more sensor-packed torso.

Three sets of arms, one for each of the three mechs.

Snap-in options separate from the base torso. For ideas, see Tomahawk I shoulder missile launcher and spotlight, Spartan I head turret, and Defender I radome(standard on Defender III, optional on Spartan III and Tomahawk III).

You've greatly reduced the force's complexity, and the machines still have a largely monolithic, cheap+sturdy design.

You could also do upgrades easily and cheaply, assuming the components aren't too tightly integrated*. Swap the Tomahawk arm guns out when something better comes along instead of replacing the entire machine, for example.

You could also put new torso designs on old legs or vice versa if the interconnect stayed standard, though you'd probably want to avoid that situation lest you wind up with a maintainence nightmare from your mish-mash of mismatched mecha.

And then my ulterior motives are revealed as we we release a new version of the 80s build-a-destroid toy based on the new designs!

MWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!

*ahem*

*The Defender I's ammo magazines and feed mechanism are part of the torso, so the arm cannons can't really be changed without a new torso to go along with it. You'd want to avoid that in a redesign if upgradability is in the cards.

The Monster DEFINITELY needs to be it's own unique platform, though. It's demands are just too different from the rest of the destroid family.

Edited February 22, 2010 by JB0

[Seto Kaiba]

The destroid evolution would work something like this in "my" universe.

I always enjoy these little speculative endeavors... especially once the military folks get involved and start dragging in practical know-how.

= Defender 2:

- Quad mounted GU-11 guns (proven very effective in fighter combat, eventhough ultimately deemed overpowered for the Valks)

- *Although, this series appears to have been ultimately replaced by the Cheyenne series, post SW1 improvements should not be ruled out.*

As JB0 said, this raises some actual barriers to performance that degrade the Defender's all-around effectiveness. I'd suggest swapping the autocannons out for something with more kick and fewer thermal issues like a railgun, but that'd be a Defender EX from Macross II: Lovers Again, provided you also strapped a defensive short-range gun and a short-range missile launcher to it too.

= Tomahawk 2:

- Railguns and DEWs in the arms

- Better integration of the missile launchers attached to the body (granted the design was heavily influenced by the modern tanks of the day).

Soooooo... basically just the Tomahawk II from Macross II then? It fills all the criteria you've listed so far... the arms contain a railgun and a beam cannon each, it's got two more dorsally-mounted beam cannons, and the missile launchers have been integrated into the frame (including pop-out launchers at the knees), and it has the wheeled feet.

= Spartan 2:

- Give the damn thing a Gu-11 gunpod! (essentially making it the ground equivalent of a battroid)

- Shrink the chest area to give it a smaller vertical profile.

You'd have to shrink the bloody hands down rather a lot to make that work... those things have HUGE hands compared to the VF-1. It'd probably be easier to keep the huge brawling arms intact and fit it with heavier fixed armaments like those chest-mounted gatling guns on Macross II's Tomahawk II.

= Phalanx:

- Discontinue the line. The same could be acheived through stationary launcher emplacements. It's largely redundant considering the amount missiles carried by other destroids. Couple that with it's lack of defensive armaments, it is a waste of resources that could be employed elsewhere.

Or... you come up with a higher-capacity version of the system and give it some defensive armaments... oh wait, that'd make it the Phalanx Kai from Macross II. The Phalanx I (Mk.XII) has 44 missiles and no defense gun, the Phalanx II has 168 missiles and a defense gun. Amusingly enough, it also has the above-stated prerequisite of wheeled feet for added mobility. When you're dealing with an enemy like the Zentradi, for whom swarming tactics with superior numbers make up almost their entire playbook, having the maximum versatility in your close-in defenses would be a very good idea. With much-improved staying power like that of the Phalanx Kai, a second-generation Phalanx could easily be a huge asset in any air-defense setup.

= Monster:

- Start the VB-X program. The size of the weapons system could lend itself well as a Marine drop ship, then transform into some sort of artillery support platform.

Now that's an interesting idea... the cabin on the VB-6 is kinda roomy, and I'm sure with a little extra work and maybe axing the battroid mode, it could serve as a "drop Monster" to carry a few squads of U.N. Spacy Marines into battle and then turn into a standard-setup Monster destroid.

And with each generation, improvements are made over the prior one. Culminating in mission specific "Weapons Packs" similar to how the Valks have evolved.

Wasn't that pretty much one of the original design concepts that didn't get used... having one common destroid chassis with different drop-in weapons arrangements?

I like to believe the destroids went to the UN Marine and ground based Army units. Where ground warfare is much more common than in the Navy. Valks in Spacy serve a dual function, whereas in a MEU or Army application a lot more ground based slugfests would occur.

Well... exactly who owned the destroids in the original Macross series is sketchy too, it might very well have been the U.N. Army or U.N. Spacy Marines instead of the U.N. Spacy itself. Macross II is the only Macross to show which branch was commanding destroids in a combat operation (the U.N. Army during the final defensive battle of the series).

Edited February 22, 2010 by Seto Kaiba

[Uxi]

I actually ignored the Phalanx in my upgrade plan explicitly. It was a jury-rigged hack to begin with, and the missile cloud tactics makes it not that effective since it runs out of ammo rapidly.

You apparently missed all the scenes of the Armored and Super VF-25 unleashing their clouds of missiles.

As well as the VF-11 Protect Armor.

[JB0]

You know... I may have to find a copy of Macross 2 and watch it again... JUST for the destroids.

[Uxi]

Mostly just need to watch the last episode, then since that's when you most of them.

[anime52k8]

I enjoy these kind of disussions too, although I've Got a fairly different interpretation from you Zinjo. In some area's I (and I hate to admit this) actually think the MacII destroids have the right idea. I still think they're ugly as sin and need drastic cosmetic overhauls but they show some interesting concepts.

Generation 2:

= All Models:

- VF-1 generation fusion reactors

- Lighter Armor, but reinforced with ECA for better mobility

- Wheel assisted ground movement for the feet (ala Mac II destroids and the Cheyenne)

Agree here mostly. Deffinately support more robust powerplants, and agree about the SWAG eca, although not neccesarally lighter. Depending on the model the same weight in armor but using ECA would be better, as that would give orders of magnetude more protection. As for wheels, I can take them or leave them. some it may be good, others not so much.

For my What if scenario, I'd see Destroids moving towards more specialized niche roles. Each model becoming more specialized for a certain task while valks fill the role of All regiment combat units.

= Defender 2:

- Quad mounted GU-11 guns (proven very effective in fighter combat, eventhough ultimately deemed overpowered for the Valks)

- *Although, this series appears to have been ultimately replaced by the Cheyenne series, post SW1 improvements should not be ruled out.*

definitely a no on the GU-11's. Also No to the big, slow firing rail guns on the Defender EX.

I see a second Gen Defender becoming a even more optimized point deference unit. instead of High power auto cannons/rail guns it would use VERY high rate of fire cannons (think 6-10,000 RPM compared to the GU-11's 1,200.) firing high velocity 30-40mm rounds (giving much more ammo than the existing Defender's 200 rounds per gun).

it would be functionally much like the Cheyenne, but minus all the extras (i.e. no hands, no missiles, no rockets, no wheels, etc.) as it would be strictly a AA mech.

= Tomahawk 2:

- Railguns and DEWs in the arms

- Better integration of the missile launchers attached to the body (granted the design was heavily influenced by the modern tanks of the day).

since the Tomahawk is a heavy ground robot for fighting other mechs I'd expect it to get larger just like the valks do. The chest missiles and Beam guns would stay (although power/capasity would increase). the chest gun clusters and the head guns are gone, and the 6 pack of missiles would be moved from the shoulder to both thighs (where the functionless boxes are now). some new features would include track feet and hands of the reverse of the beam guns like the Cheyenne. and maybe a shoulder mounted fixture similar to a CWIS unit for unarmored targets and active missile defense.

= Spartan 2:

- Give the damn thing a Gu-11 gunpod! (essentially making it the ground equivalent of a battroid)

- Shrink the chest area to give it a smaller vertical profile.

The spartan is a complete wast of a robot in its current form. Why would you want a melee focused combat mech? Give the Tomahawk some hands and it's got adequate melee capability with more mid-to-long range firepower. The only real use of the spartan is for riot control/police work against full size zentradi. In that case make it more like a large Ingram from patlabor. strip it completely of onboard weapons and make it more streamlined (more like a car and less like a combat robot). give it light armor, weapons and use it to smack down unruly giants.

= Phalanx:

- Discontinue the line. The same could be acheived through stationary launcher emplacements. It's largely redundant considering the amount missiles carried by other destroids. Couple that with it's lack of defensive armaments, it is a waste of resources that could be employed elsewhere.

Totally disagree. despite how much I hate MacII, I do think that the double missile pods are a good idea. The Phalanx makes a good complement to the Gen 2 defender. While the Defender acts as a point defense unit, the Phalanx would function as an area defense unit. rather than carry mirco-missiles, the gen 2 Phalanx would use larger, long range missiles giving it greater range than the most other mecha. coupled with drastically improved sensors the gen 2 phalanx would suppress enemy activity in a wide area like a modern SAM site.

= Monster:

- Start the VB-X program. The size of the weapons system could lend itself well as a Marine drop ship, then transform into some sort of artillery support platform.

pretty much, there's not much you can do with it besides make it more mobile (i.e. give it an aircraft mode). although with the VB-6, I've always though it would be interesting to see the cannons removed and replaced with a single bay for large numbers of conventional bombs ore guided missiles.

Of course over time upgraded weapons and systems would be added as they're developed.

[Beltane70]

I one was going to replace the Destroids Just develop a Meltran Combat armored suit (I forget the Name) adapt it for a Miclon use. It has a Large Zentradi size Cavity inside though I don't know if the Pilots actually uses their arms and legs to move the Machines limbs (Iron Man)or if it is just arm and leg movement being interpited by a computer (Full Metal Panic).

I don't know about the legs, but the pilot's arms don't go into the arms of the female power armor.