Advanced Destroid Program (Destroid Upgrades)

[cheemingwan1234]

Okay, Destroids have been relegated to the sidelines in Macross for Variable Fighters, so what type of upgrades can be done to Destroids to make them more relevant in a changing battlefield.

(And no, the Koing Monster does  not count as a Destroid. It's a Variable Bomber)

Ideas:

Rollers on feet a la Cheyenne II and Macross II Destroids. (and a must)

Modular chassis with interchangeable and easy to swap out weapons.

EX-Gear for better weapon aiming

Pin point barriers and Energy Conversion Armor incorporated into Destroids (I bet they can tank more than VFs since they don' t have to contend with a thing called flying)

 

Edited November 18, 2023 by cheemingwan1234

[Bolt]

Thermometer weapons containers.

[azrael]

Oh the infamous "make Destroids better"-thread.

4 hours ago, cheemingwan1234 said:

Rollers on feet a la Cheyenne II and Macross II Destroids. (and a must)

Might as well just use the Cheyenne II. It's a ADR-spec that is also an MBR.

4 hours ago, cheemingwan1234 said:

Modular chassis with interchangeable and easy to swap out weapons.

The old Tomahawk, Phalanx and Defender all used the same legs but with different stuff added on. All 3 are walking turrets. And their weapons are already noted as interchangeable.

4 hours ago, cheemingwan1234 said:

EX-Gear for better weapon aiming

There's no evidence EX-Gears actually improved pilot aiming. Destroids already use a sophisticated FCS with AI support and radar with excellent target tracking. 

4 hours ago, cheemingwan1234 said:

Pin point barriers and Energy Conversion Armor incorporated into Destroids (I bet they can tank more than VFs since they don' t have to contend with a thing called flying)

Destroids aren't THAT big so they don't have THAT big of a reactor to power everything. Pin-point barrier and ECA use power dedicated to powering weapons which have significantly more firepower than most VFs.

[Seto Kaiba]

6 hours ago, cheemingwan1234 said:

Okay, Destroids have been relegated to the sidelines in Macross for Variable Fighters, so what type of upgrades can be done to Destroids to make them more relevant in a changing battlefield.

Well, nothing... that's kind of the problem.

Destroids ended up sidelined after the First Space War because the assumptions underpinning their development and deployment turned out to be wildly incorrect.

The Earth Unification Government and its newly-established Earth UN Forces believed that a future war with aliens would take the form of a classic "alien invasion" scenario.  They were expecting the hypothetical future enemy to focus on penetrating Earth's orbital defenses in order to land ground forces on the planet's surface and seize territory.  Earth's new space-based defenses were set up as static "space airbases" and guided missile destroyers intent on sinking enemy ships trying to land on the planet, while ground-based defense focused on regional defense forces and large seagoing mobile reaction forces that could redirect to respond to anywhere an invasion might land.  The Destroids were developed for that ground-centric defense plan as a next-generation overtechnology-based replacement for main battle tanks.

But the Earth UN Government couldn't have been more wrong.  The Zentradi had no interest in capturing and occupying territory or securing resources.  Their one and only mission was "Destroy the enemy" and did so on a scale that meant planetary destruction could be done relatively casually.  As land warfare weapons in a space war, the Destroids weren't exactly useful for much except as ad hoc air defense guns on the SDF-1 Macross.

After the war, the New UN Government and New UN Forces had a better idea of how space warfare actually worked, and with land warfare not really in the cards there wasn't any reason to keep developing Destroids.  Most New UN Forces warships weren't big enough to support them and the same air defense role could be done much more effectively by a static beam CIWS or anti-aircraft missile system.  Development of destroids basically stopped at that point because the concept itself was flawed.  The only Destroids that we're shown after the First Space War are original models from the early 2000s either being used as-is or with marginal upgrades for niche roles.  At the end of the day, they couldn't make them more viable... just slightly better in their already niche role.

 

 

6 hours ago, cheemingwan1234 said:

Rollers on feet a la Cheyenne II and Macross II Destroids. (and a must)

TBH, this was one of the "niche roles" features mentioned above.

In Macross II, the rollers were intended to make it easier for the Destroids to reposition on the outside of the Spacy's warships... but those ships are MUCH bigger than the ships the main Macross timeline has.

In Macross Frontier, they were intended mainly to stop the Cheyenne II from ripping up the pavement inside of the emigrant ships.  That was their main functional advantage... not pissing off the road commission.

 

6 hours ago, cheemingwan1234 said:

Modular chassis with interchangeable and easy to swap out weapons.

Not sure what that'd achieve, really... most of the Destroids in the original series already had a common/shared drivetrain (Series 04).  The only real exceptions were the Spartan (a Series 07 design) and the Monster (a Series 00 design).  The original Series 04 design, which became the Tomahawk, did have an ability to swap out certain weapons but it wasn't really that useful.  The ability was seemingly abandoned after the MBR-04-Mk.IV's option to exchange the particle beam cannons for a pair of rotary cannons.

 

6 hours ago, cheemingwan1234 said:

EX-Gear for better weapon aiming

EX-Gear doesn't help with aiming.  That's the Fire Control System's job.

It's designed to help with piloting, and specifically piloting a Variable Fighter, by making the interface more intuitive... which is occasionally described as creating the feeling that the pilot is wearing the Variable Fighter itself.

 

6 hours ago, cheemingwan1234 said:

Pin point barriers and Energy Conversion Armor incorporated into Destroids (I bet they can tank more than VFs since they don' t have to contend with a thing called flying)

Energy conversion armor and pinpoint barriers are two of the three most energy-intensive systems a Valkyrie has.  (The third is active stealth.)

Energy conversion armor was a concession made for Valkyries to keep their weight down, beefing up the strength of relatively thin armor plating instead of layering on thick slabs of composite armor.  Destroids didn't need to fly, so they were able to keep costs down by using a much lower-output reactor that met the needs of the superconducting motors in the walking drivetrain and the few onboard beam weapons thanks to being able to achieve their defensive ability through making the armor itself thicker.  This meant that a Destroid could be manufactured for as little as 1/20th what a Valkyrie cost in the First Space War.

A Destroid would need more, and vastly more powerful, reactors to incorporate energy conversion armor and pinpoint barrier systems.  To the point that it wouldn't be a Destroid so much as a non-transformable, flightless Battroid... and at that point, why not just go the rest of the way to making a Valkyrie esp. since you'd already have two Valkyrie-grade reactors.

[cheemingwan1234]

19 minutes ago, Seto Kaiba said:

Well, nothing... that's kind of the problem.

Destroids ended up sidelined after the First Space War because the assumptions underpinning their development and deployment turned out to be wildly incorrect.

The Earth Unification Government and its newly-established Earth UN Forces believed that a future war with aliens would take the form of a classic "alien invasion" scenario.  They were expecting the hypothetical future enemy to focus on penetrating Earth's orbital defenses in order to land ground forces on the planet's surface and seize territory.  Earth's new space-based defenses were set up as static "space airbases" and guided missile destroyers intent on sinking enemy ships trying to land on the planet, while ground-based defense focused on regional defense forces and large seagoing mobile reaction forces that could redirect to respond to anywhere an invasion might land.  The Destroids were developed for that ground-centric defense plan as a next-generation overtechnology-based replacement for main battle tanks.

But the Earth UN Government couldn't have been more wrong.  The Zentradi had no interest in capturing and occupying territory or securing resources.  Their one and only mission was "Destroy the enemy" and did so on a scale that meant planetary destruction could be done relatively casually.  As land warfare weapons in a space war, the Destroids weren't exactly useful for much except as ad hoc air defense guns on the SDF-1 Macross.

After the war, the New UN Government and New UN Forces had a better idea of how space warfare actually worked, and with land warfare not really in the cards there wasn't any reason to keep developing Destroids.  Most New UN Forces warships weren't big enough to support them and the same air defense role could be done much more effectively by a static beam CIWS or anti-aircraft missile system.  Development of destroids basically stopped at that point because the concept itself was flawed.  The only Destroids that we're shown after the First Space War are original models from the early 2000s either being used as-is or with marginal upgrades for niche roles.  At the end of the day, they couldn't make them more viable... just slightly better in their already niche role.

 

 

TBH, this was one of the "niche roles" features mentioned above.

In Macross II, the rollers were intended to make it easier for the Destroids to reposition on the outside of the Spacy's warships... but those ships are MUCH bigger than the ships the main Macross timeline has.

In Macross Frontier, they were intended mainly to stop the Cheyenne II from ripping up the pavement inside of the emigrant ships.  That was their main functional advantage... not pissing off the road commission.

 

Not sure what that'd achieve, really... most of the Destroids in the original series already had a common/shared drivetrain (Series 04).  The only real exceptions were the Spartan (a Series 07 design) and the Monster (a Series 00 design).  The original Series 04 design, which became the Tomahawk, did have an ability to swap out certain weapons but it wasn't really that useful.  The ability was seemingly abandoned after the MBR-04-Mk.IV's option to exchange the particle beam cannons for a pair of rotary cannons.

 

EX-Gear doesn't help with aiming.  That's the Fire Control System's job.

It's designed to help with piloting, and specifically piloting a Variable Fighter, by making the interface more intuitive... which is occasionally described as creating the feeling that the pilot is wearing the Variable Fighter itself.

 

Energy conversion armor and pinpoint barriers are two of the three most energy-intensive systems a Valkyrie has.  (The third is active stealth.)

Energy conversion armor was a concession made for Valkyries to keep their weight down, beefing up the strength of relatively thin armor plating instead of layering on thick slabs of composite armor.  Destroids didn't need to fly, so they were able to keep costs down by using a much lower-output reactor that met the needs of the superconducting motors in the walking drivetrain and the few onboard beam weapons thanks to being able to achieve their defensive ability through making the armor itself thicker.  This meant that a Destroid could be manufactured for as little as 1/20th what a Valkyrie cost in the First Space War.

A Destroid would need more, and vastly more powerful, reactors to incorporate energy conversion armor and pinpoint barrier systems.  To the point that it wouldn't be a Destroid so much as a non-transformable, flightless Battroid... and at that point, why not just go the rest of the way to making a Valkyrie esp. since you'd already have two Valkyrie-grade reactors.

Darn! So that's why we don't see them running around that much by the time Frontier takes place.

[Seto Kaiba]

1 hour ago, cheemingwan1234 said:

Darn! So that's why we don't see them running around that much by the time Frontier takes place.

Yup.  By 2059, Destroids as a whole have basically been an obsolete concept for almost fifty years.

They were developed to be cheap, efficient, high production volume tank equivalents to repel an invading force on the ground... but ended up as overpriced and overcomplicated anti-aircraft guns on the one ship big enough to support them.  They lost out to fixed anti-aircraft guns and missile launchers that could do the same job for a fraction of the cost.  That made them surplus to requirements, and many surviving Destroids were decommissioned, sold off, and repurposed as heavy machinery for construction, demolition, mining, etc.  It remains their primary niche into the 2060s, with Destroid derivatives intended for heavy labor ("Workroids") being fairly strong sellers.

Even in the Macross Frontier fleet, which still uses an upgraded version of the ADR-03 Cheyenne, the Destroids are not particularly effective as air defense platforms and operate as unmanned, remotely controlled gun turrets a fair amount of the time.

[JB0]

I sort of feel like the reasons for not making "next-gen" destroids is a case of building for the last war instead of the next one.

We know the colonies are not all one big happy family. There have been full-on wars between colonies. If one colony decides to annex another one, they're going to need ground forces. An army of destroids will be cheaper than VFs outfitted with ground combat packs, and require less training for operators and maintenance crews.

 

 

Fortunately, making a modernized destroid isn't complicated. The variable fighter's nature as a multi-mode all-regime combat unit means that development of battroid-esque combat capabilities continues.

When someone finds they need a dedicated ground force again, it will be relatively simple to start with a variable fighter in battroid mode, scrap the complexity of transforming. After that, they can start tweaking. Heavier armor, bigger guns, larger ammo reserves. Keep the energized armor(but much thicker), scrap the inertia management(or minimize it to just what's useful for recoil management).

[pengbuzz]

14 hours ago, cheemingwan1234 said:

Okay, Destroids have been relegated to the sidelines in Macross for Variable Fighters, so what type of upgrades can be done to Destroids to make them more relevant in a changing battlefield.

Paint them in day-glow colors, with a nice big target painted on them in red and white.

That's all they would be good for, TBH. >_>

Edited November 19, 2023 by pengbuzz

[Seto Kaiba]

2 hours ago, JB0 said:

I sort of feel like the reasons for not making "next-gen" destroids is a case of building for the last war instead of the next one.

We know the colonies are not all one big happy family. There have been full-on wars between colonies. If one colony decides to annex another one, they're going to need ground forces. An army of destroids will be cheaper than VFs outfitted with ground combat packs, and require less training for operators and maintenance crews.

Emigrant governments have ground forces... we've seen them in Macross Frontier.  Infantry and armored fighting vehicles.  You don't need destroids for an occupation force.

Destroids may be cheaper than Valkyries, but more doesn't necessarily mean better.  Or even at parity with a smaller number of Valkyries.

After all, Valkyries are designed to fight against a numerically superior foe and excel at simultaneously engaging multiple targets.  They've only gotten better at it as time has gone on too thanks to improvements in maneuverability, stealthiness, and the ability to engage more and more targets simultaneously.  Destroids can only maneuver in two dimensions and they're not particularly fast because they're limited to walking/running speeds based on available traction, making them much less able to evade enemy fire.  Macross Delta's first episode is a pretty good example of what would happen in a situation like that: anti-aircraft units like the Cheyenne II caught in the open are going to get cut to pieces quickly and efficiently by any enemy with higher mobility.  

[sketchley]

5 hours ago, JB0 said:

Fortunately, making a modernized destroid isn't complicated. The variable fighter's nature as a multi-mode all-regime combat unit means that development of battroid-esque combat capabilities continues.

 

When someone finds they need a dedicated ground force again, it will be relatively simple to start with a variable fighter in battroid mode, scrap the complexity of transforming. After that, they can start tweaking. Heavier armor, bigger guns, larger ammo reserves. Keep the energized armor(but much thicker), scrap the inertia management(or minimize it to just what's useful for recoil management).

In a way, Destroids have never really gone away.  Because Macross focuses on the Valkyries, the Destroids hardly ever appear, if at all.

Post SWI, aside from the aforementioned Cheyenne II and the Destroids that appeared in Macross 7, there are:

• Destroid Works (arguably the most likely to be quickly developed into a combat Destroid): http://sdfyodogawa.mywebcommunity.org/Stats/Statistics/Cheyenne/Works.php
• the Destroid Works-esque Power Loader that appeared in Macross Delta
• the LDR-04 Maverick that appeared in one of the late 90's/early 00's games*
• ADR-04-Mk XV S-Defender from Macross the Ride: http://sdfyodogawa.mywebcommunity.org/Stats/Statistics/Defender/S-Defender.php
• Shield enhanced Destroid Monsters (on Bellfan April 2030) from the Macross M3 game**

 

Looking farther afield, there are a pair of Destroid-like vehicles introduced in the VF-X2 game:

• Annabella Lasiodora
• Gjagravan Va

Combined with the Zentrādi Armoured Personnel Carrier that appeared in the SS/PS1 Super Dimensional Fortress Macross - Do You Remember Love? side scroller, ground-based, non-transforming mecha are still being introduced in the series, when and where applicable.

 

Nevertheless, this doesn't negate Seto Kaiba's point: there's a reason why the post-SDFM/DYRL Macross shows focus on the Valkyries, and the Destroids (if they appear at all) are relatively easy-to-defeat peons mainly used by the show runners to illustrate how relatively powerful the 'new' enemy forces are.

 

 

On the topic of modifying a Battroid into a Destroid-like vehicle, there is the rejected design from SDFM for the MBR-08 Masamune (not sure if it's the correct designation, either).

 

* note sure if that is the official name and designation for it.  Nevertheless, it's penned by Kazutaka Miyatake himself.

** if memory serves, they are operated by the game's enemy forces.  Nevertheless, an official example of Destroids with something akin to Pinpoint Barriers.

[sketchley]

1 hour ago, Seto Kaiba said:

Emigrant governments have ground forces... we've seen them in Macross Frontier.  Infantry and armored fighting vehicles.  You don't need destroids for an occupation force.

Some links to images of the ground forces/infantry he's referring to:

• New Unified Forces Soldier Combat Uniform: http://sdfyodogawa.mywebcommunity.org/Stats/Statistics/Flightsuits/Spacesuits.php#MFMun2
• Beatrice: http://sdfyodogawa.mywebcommunity.org/Stats/Statistics/AFV/Beatrice.php

There are also the Special Forces version of EX-Gear shown in the Frontier movies that were retrospectively added, as well.

 

It should be noted that the Beatrice was just as quickly destroyed by the Heavy Soldier Vajra, but the Cheyenne II was more effective at destroying the larval Vajra with its flame units.

[Seto Kaiba]

12 hours ago, sketchley said:

• the LDR-04 Maverick that appeared in one of the late 90's/early 00's games*

From Macross: Remember Me in '93.  The LDR-04 Maverick destroid is basically just a Phalanx with long-range missiles instead of short-range ones.

 

12 hours ago, sketchley said:

• ADR-04-Mk XV S-Defender from Macross the Ride: http://sdfyodogawa.mywebcommunity.org/Stats/Statistics/Defender/S-Defender.php

Not the only attempt at a refurbished Destroid that appears in Macross the Ride either...

Macross Galaxy was experimenting with modernizing some of the legacy Destroid designs it inherited from the companies that merged to form it, though the Super Defender was the only one that was substantially modified.  They also had minimally modernized versions of the Tomahawk and Phalanx.  Didn't work so great, but Macross Galaxy's Corporate Army liked to make a show of using a lot of General Galaxy current and former products.

 

12 hours ago, sketchley said:

On the topic of modifying a Battroid into a Destroid-like vehicle, there is the rejected design from SDFM for the MBR-08 Masamune (not sure if it's the correct designation, either).

It was one of the unused/rejected design studies for ground mecha that was a part of development of the Tomahawk.

Macross Perfect Memory calls it the MBR-08-Mk.II Heavy Battroid or MBR-11 Heavy Battroid.  It's basically a Mobile Suit, which is probably why it was dropped.  It was meant to be able to share hardware with the Tomahawk Destroid, swapping between a set of arms able to hold a gunpod and the Tomahawk's default armament.

[pengbuzz]

If anyone ever wants to see how badly Destroids sucked in combat in Space War 1, just play Robotech: Battlecry. You'll see up close why they stink on ice...

[DewPoint]

Aren't Destroids effectively replaced by Zentradi Mecha?

[Seto Kaiba]

5 hours ago, pengbuzz said:

If anyone ever wants to see how badly Destroids sucked in combat in Space War 1, just play Robotech: Battlecry. You'll see up close why they stink on ice...

Eh... citing Robotech is a bit like citing a particularly awful fanfic.

If you want to see Destroids jobbing, you really just have to watch Macross Plus, Macross Frontier, or Macross Delta.

 

29 minutes ago, DewPoint said:

Aren't Destroids effectively replaced by Zentradi Mecha?

On the ground, I guess... a mixture of battle pods, Valkyrie battroids, and conventional armored fighting vehicles.

On ships, they've been replaced with beam CIWS and anti-aircraft missile launcher systems.

[pengbuzz]

29 minutes ago, Seto Kaiba said:

Eh... citing Robotech is a bit like citing a particularly awful fanfic.

If you want to see Destroids jobbing, you really just have to watch Macross Plus, Macross Frontier, or Macross Delta.

I mention it because they were slow, plodding and kept getting blown to bits by the faster Zentraedi mecha. I think in that respect, they got it right.

Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

[Devil 505]

On 11/18/2023 at 9:12 AM, cheemingwan1234 said:

(And no, the Koing Monster does  not count as a Destroid. It's a Variable Bomber)

That's the thing, the König Monster does represent the evolution of Destroids as a result of the shift from land to space combat.

[Seto Kaiba]

7 hours ago, Devil 505 said:

That's the thing, the König Monster does represent the evolution of Destroids as a result of the shift from land to space combat.

To be fair, the OP has a pretty good point about the (in)validity of the VB-6 as an argument.

The VB-6 Konig Monster is a Variable Bomber.  Its Heavy GERWALK mode resembles an old model Destroid and its Battroid mode is somewhat counterintuitively named "Destroid" mode, but as a Variable aircraft it's technically part of the rival Battroid design lineage and not truly a further development of the Destroid concept.

By the definition Macross Chronicle gives us, a Destroid is a non-transformable, heavily armed, AFV-equivalent walker for land warfare.  

Macross Chronicle does, somewhat charitably, describe the Konig Monster as an offshoot of the Destroid concept that emerged after Destroid development died out in its glossary entry but I don't think that's quite the direction the OP was looking for.🤷‍♂️

[Devil 505]

2 hours ago, Seto Kaiba said:

To be fair, the OP has a pretty good point about the (in)validity of the VB-6 as an argument.

The VB-6 Konig Monster is a Variable Bomber.  Its Heavy GERWALK mode resembles an old model Destroid and its Battroid mode is somewhat counterintuitively named "Destroid" mode, but as a Variable aircraft it's technically part of the rival Battroid design lineage and not truly a further development of the Destroid concept.

By the definition Macross Chronicle gives us, a Destroid is a non-transformable, heavily armed, AFV-equivalent walker for land warfare.  

Macross Chronicle does, somewhat charitably, describe the Konig Monster as an offshoot of the Destroid concept that emerged after Destroid development died out in its glossary entry but I don't think that's quite the direction the OP was looking for.🤷‍♂️

As you said earlier, there hasn't been much need for Destroid development following Space War I.  The only new thing I could think of for Destroids would probably be sound energy loudspeakers for that kind of warfare.

[JB0]

I'm not really sure what purpose the variable Monster actually serves.

 

It's a Monster that transforms into a jet, sure. But it isn't aerodynamic enough to make sense in atmosphere, and you can just boost around in artillery mode in space, so... why? It is a Monster with more points of failure for no gain.

 

[kajnrig]

I for one am all for new and improved destroid designs, for the most obvious reason that it gives us cool new mecha designs to fawn over.

[Seto Kaiba]

25 minutes ago, JB0 said:

I'm not really sure what purpose the variable Monster actually serves.

 

It's a Monster that transforms into a jet, sure. But it isn't aerodynamic enough to make sense in atmosphere, and you can just boost around in artillery mode in space, so... why? It is a Monster with more points of failure for no gain.

It's aerodynamic enough to work in atmosphere. It's a lifting body design. It's not going to win any prizes for speed or making tight turns, but then bombers seldom do.

In principle, it's a medium bomber that is also a self-delivering artillery piece capable of firing guided and unguided long-range munitions. It's a more situational weapon than a normal VF but it is supremely good at making enemy fortifications and warships go away. Especially since it can be outfitted to deliver thermonuclear reaction weapons en masse.

It's just not particularly relevant to this line of inquiry because it's not really a destroid in the strictest sense of the term.

 

2 hours ago, Devil 505 said:

As you said earlier, there hasn't been much need for Destroid development following Space War I.  The only new thing I could think of for Destroids would probably be sound energy loudspeakers for that kind of warfare.

The main niche they seem to have carved out for themselves is the workroid... a non-military utility robot for all kinds of different heavy machinery applications. That they make them literally nimble enough to dance is kind of impressive in a way. It's probably not necessary for a giant robot forklift to be so agile, but one can only imagine that it's probably pretty multi-purposeful if it can clear a modern dance class while handling large cargo containers.

[Devil 505]

17 hours ago, Seto Kaiba said:

It's aerodynamic enough to work in atmosphere. It's a lifting body design. It's not going to win any prizes for speed or making tight turns, but then bombers seldom do.

In principle, it's a medium bomber that is also a self-delivering artillery piece capable of firing guided and unguided long-range munitions. It's a more situational weapon than a normal VF but it is supremely good at making enemy fortifications and warships go away. Especially since it can be outfitted to deliver thermonuclear reaction weapons en masse.

It's just not particularly relevant to this line of inquiry because it's not really a destroid in the strictest sense of the term.

 

The main niche they seem to have carved out for themselves is the workroid... a non-military utility robot for all kinds of different heavy machinery applications. That they make them literally nimble enough to dance is kind of impressive in a way. It's probably not necessary for a giant robot forklift to be so agile, but one can only imagine that it's probably pretty multi-purposeful if it can clear a modern dance class while handling large cargo containers.

That does make sense, like the labors in "Patlabor."

At the risk of derailing this thread further by pivoting back to the König Monster, I feel like a further evolution could be a "variable gunship" of sorts, akin to an AC-130, considering that it already has the artillery for it.

[Seto Kaiba]

33 minutes ago, Devil 505 said:

At the risk of derailing this thread further by pivoting back to the König Monster, I feel like a further evolution could be a "variable gunship" of sorts, akin to an AC-130, considering that it already has the artillery for it.

There is something vaguely like that which appears in Macross VF-X2 and is mentioned in passing in the Macross Frontier short stories.

It's officially given the more vague and nebulous classification of "Mobile Weapon", and structurally it's more like a Gundam Mobile Armor than a Destroid, but the mobile weapon "Annabella Lasiodora" is a [large aircraft/small warship]-sized mobile weapon with six arms/legs that's fought inside of Ceres Base in Macross VF-X2's 10th mission.  (Why it has only six limbs when it's apparently named for a genus of tarantula, I cannot say.)  The Macross Frontier short story "Wired Warrior" suggests it's a 2040s-era offshoot of Destroid development that, like the Konig Monster, is a heavy artillery platform.

[TG Remix]

15 hours ago, Seto Kaiba said:

It's officially given the more vague and nebulous classification of "Mobile Weapon", and structurally it's more like a Gundam Mobile Armor than a Destroid, but the mobile weapon "Annabella Lasiodora" is a [large aircraft/small warship]-sized mobile weapon with six arms/legs that's fought inside of Ceres Base in Macross VF-X2's 10th mission.  (Why it has only six limbs when it's apparently named for a genus of tarantula, I cannot say.)  The Macross Frontier short story "Wired Warrior" suggests it's a 2040s-era offshoot of Destroid development that, like the Konig Monster, is a heavy artillery platform.

There's also the Gjagravan-Va in the game's Mission 6, which IIRC was also compared to Destroids as well, and was close as one since it's pretty mobile all things considered when you fight it.

[Seto Kaiba]

48 minutes ago, TG Remix said:

There's also the Gjagravan-Va in the game's Mission 6, which IIRC was also compared to Destroids as well, and was close as one since it's pretty mobile all things considered when you fight it.

I believe that one's another one that was filed under the somewhat vague title of "Mobile Weapon".

[sketchley]

The way that "Mobile Weapon" is used in the original materials, it appears to explicitly mean Zentradi mecha.

 

Obviously there's a lot of overlap between the human ground mecha and Zentradi mecha.  So, the way "Mobile Weapon" and "Destroid" are used in the original Japanese is more to describe the primary user rather than the purpose or use (especially as such things as the "Fighter Pods" are also described as Mobile Weapons!)

Edited December 31, 2023 by sketchley

[Seto Kaiba]

31 minutes ago, sketchley said:

The way that "Mobile Weapon" is used in the original materials, it appears to explicitly mean Zentradi mecha.

That line seems to have blurred somewhat in subsequent materials.

The Gjagravan Va and Annabella Lasiodora are implied or outright stated to be products of Human defense corporations, for instance.

 

31 minutes ago, sketchley said:

Obviously there's a lot of overlap between the human ground mecha and Zentradi mecha.  So, the way "Mobile Weapon" and "Destroid" are used in the original Japanese is more to describe the primary user rather than the purpose or use (especially as such things as the "Fighter Pods" are also described as Mobile Weapons!)

That does seem to have been the original intended usage... but the term seems to have broadened somewhat with time, to the point that the term "mobile weapon" is being used more like a generic term for any of the robotic weapons or for anything that doesn't neatly fit into an existing category like "Valkyrie", "Destroid", or "Battle Pod". Similar in principle to how it's used in Gundam.

[Graham]

I've always thought calling the VB-6 a "Variable Bomber" is kinda silly as it doesn't carry any bombs, so can't drop any bombs.

If you are going to keep the "VB" designation, it would make more sense to call it a "Variable Bombarder", as it's basically a highly mobile artillery piece that solves the problem of the extremely limited mobility and speed of the original Destroid Monster, by being able to rapidly fly to any point required in the battle space in a short period of time.

Thus making the VB-6 much more tactically relevant and useful compared to the original Destroid Monster.

 

 

[sketchley]

I think there's a bit of 'lost in translation' (E→J) and 'wasei eigo' (Japanese English) that makes the naming confusing for us native English speakers.  Macross Chronicle* explained the roles of each type of Variable craft somewhat.  VA and VB are:

Quote

VA (Variable Attacker):  VA's are centred on such things as ground attacks. Even though they have low manoeuvrability and their hand-to-hand combat abilities are inferior, compared to a VF, the VA has the advantage of excellent bullet resistance as well as being able to be equipped with large amount of munitions.

VB (Variable Bomber):  VBs carry out ground and anti-ship attacks. They have a specification that takes the performance inclination of the VA to the extreme, are the largest class of variable craft, and are equipped with the maximum strength of firepower and bullet-resistance.

 

 

It also doesn't help that the only example of a VB we've seen is the VB-6...

 

* http://sdfyodogawa.mywebcommunity.org/MCRtechnology/01aVariableFighter.php

Edited February 1 by sketchley

[Jebe457]

In a lot of respects the OG Destroids amounted to Studio Nue, being Studio Nue where like they had done on SBY II they produced a lot more design work than the Production Staff could realistically use.

 

The Tomahawk had very clear inspiration from the then relatively new JSDF Type 74

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_74

The Defender while in practice arguably more a reference to the Shilka, was in turn likely influenced by the JDSF's use of:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M42_Duster

and what would then have been the beginning of rumblings for a replacement that would ultimately be:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_87_self-propelled_anti-aircraft_gun

I think we can reasonably in turn argue the Monster literally having 40cm cannons setup the way it does amounted to a reference to...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_battleship_Yamato

a certain iconic ship which they at the time had spent a few years working on a kind of important Anime production involving called SBY II, which was arguably responsible to the shift towards Japanese Animation getting larger budgets and Anime as we understand it becoming a thing.

In a lot of respect the rest fill in from there.  Contrary to the usual stereotype SDF:M doesn't portray these platforms as lacking, but it does pretty clearly have issues with integrating them.

If we don't overly focus on the period where the Bubble Economy and related meant Studio Nue's efforts with the Macross didn't really have a budget [read Macross 7]:

• They're acknowledged as a thing in Macross Plus [1994-95], despite that being a short OVA with a big focus on a Pair of Prototype VFs.
  • Mind in turn 1994 is around when Evangelion is creating a splash in part because people are beginning to realize what will come to be called The Lost Decade isn't a short term problem.
• The Macross Zero OVA [2002-2004] makes a point to do significant design work to create the Cheyenne, a reworked prototype Monster, and VF-0 Armored Valkyrie.
• Macross Frontier [2008] then sees them finally get that kind of budget for a TV series where they decide to effectively iterate the Cheyenne/Monster/VF combo.

Macross Zero & Frontier in turn found a balance where the depicted Destroids were purposeful, with their inclusion not being burdensome to Production.  So that's arguably what we're looking at having happened, and that approaching being easier in that regard where SDF:M never quite managed to make it work is why we're liable to see them stick with that.

Mind in turn that Studio Nue has had a not exactly minor hand in Armored Core Mecha design.

 

I would argue Sensible Upgrading the Type-04 line and the Type-07 line is relatively straightforward based on precedence to the VF-11 era, but represent hardware that would be more trouble than their worth for Show Production.

• Tomahawk
  • Basic Generational Tech upgrade evolutions, ala newer computers, actuators, etc.
  • Mount Gatlings alongside the PPGs like the Cheyenne II
  • Rewire the modular shoulder mounts to be able to also handle a pair of head laser analogues.
  • Structure the associated group to have a mix of laser and missile packs on the shoulder mounts to help with doing the equivalent of VFs & Battlepods gunning at incoming missiles.

The obvious problem with this is you're adding a lot of stuff for Show Production to account for in scene planning versus the Cheyenne II, and you wouldn't really get much of an opportunity to use it productively beyond what you get with depicting Cheyenne IIs.

• Defender
  • Basic Generational Tech upgrade evolutions, ala newer computers, actuators, etc.
  • Setup a version that's basically the classic config with the extra hard-points of the official upgrade top/bottom on each arm.
  • Longer range version with the OG quad cannons, and something along the lines of AAM-1 triples per hardpoint.
  • Shorter range version with the Rotaries, and Micro-pods as officially depicted.

Again in Show Production terms this would tend to cause needless scene planning complications versus just using Cheyenne IIs.

• Spartan
  • Basic Generational Tech upgrade evolutions, ala newer computers, actuators, etc.
  • VF-11 style gun pod with integrated bayonet and field swappable magazines.
  • VF-11 style Ballistic Shield, albeit a bit larger with spare mags mounted on the backside as with the VF-11

In universe it's worth emphasizing Global was very explicit at the end of SDF:M in his desire that UN Spacy not become a militaristic conquering force like the Zentradi.  In real world terms this echoes the sentiment that for a variety of reasons the Japanese people aren't exactly going to be fond of the notion of _them_ occupying someone.

Additional Note:

The Type-04 as of SW1 could beat the VF-1 in a foot race at 180kph vs. 160 kph, and both the Type-04 and Type-07s already integrated Jump Jet systems.  So a SW1 era VF only has a mobility advantage of the 1/10th of price Destroid if it's in one of the other modes.

[Seto Kaiba]

1 hour ago, Jebe457 said:

In a lot of respects the OG Destroids amounted to Studio Nue, being Studio Nue where like they had done on SBY II they produced a lot more design work than the Production Staff could realistically use.

... none of that has anything to do with the topic, though.

A lot of it is also not accurate.  For instance, the acknowledged inspiration for the Defender is West Germany's Flakpanzer Gepard, not the Shilka or M42.

 

2 hours ago, Jebe457 said:

• They're acknowledged as a thing in Macross Plus [1994-95], despite that being a short OVA with a big focus on a Pair of Prototype VFs.
• The Macross Zero OVA [2002-2004] makes a point to do significant design work to create the Cheyenne, a reworked prototype Monster, and VF-0 Armored Valkyrie.
• Macross Frontier [2008] then sees them finally get that kind of budget for a TV series where they decide to effectively iterate the Cheyenne/Monster/VF combo.

Granted, Destroids were a thing in Macross Plus and Macross 7... but only decommissioned units that had either been repurposed as targets for live fire exercises (Plus) or sold off to civilians and veterans for use as heavy industrial equipment (7).

Macross Zero did introduce new Destroid designs in the form of the Prototype Monster (Mk.IP), the ADR-03 Cheyenne, and the Octos.  But that was period-appropriate for the story, since it's set in 2008 before the First Space War revealed that the Earth UN Forces completely misread how a space war would work and the idea was quietly abandoned.

Macross Frontier reused the Cheyenne art assets from Zero for an anti-air unit that once again proved to be ineffective and whose main virtue was (no joke) that its wheels didn't tear up the pavement and the Konig Monster's not a Destroid.  The Cheyenne II shows up again in Macross Delta where it's outclassed by even the humble Regult.

 

1 hour ago, Jebe457 said:

I would argue Sensible Upgrading the Type-04 line and the Type-07 line is relatively straightforward based on precedence to the VF-11 era, but represent hardware that would be more trouble than their worth for Show Production.

The main roadblock to upgrading destroids isn't that it's not technically feasible... it's that the entire concept underpinning the Destroid design is wrong-headed.

They were designed around the expectation that a war with aliens would be a classic "alien invasion" scenario.  That's just not how space warfare works in the setting.  Zentradi main fleets glass enemy planets from orbit and have no interest in capturing territory for the meagre resources of a single planet.  They were hastily repurposed as anti-aircraft defenses aboard the Macross, but that only worked because the ship was HUGE and the situation was dire.  Ships built later are much smaller, and the same job can be done far more cheaply by the conventional anti-aircraft emplacements that replaced Destroids in that capacity.

 

1 hour ago, Jebe457 said:

The Type-04 as of SW1 could beat the VF-1 in a foot race at 180kph vs. 160 kph, and both the Type-04 and Type-07s already integrated Jump Jet systems.  So a SW1 era VF only has a mobility advantage of the 1/10th of price Destroid if it's in one of the other modes.

TBH, that's only really reflective of the fact that the Tomahawk was designed exclusively for land warfare while the Valkyrie is an aircraft.

Being slightly faster on the ground while walking won't do the Tomahawk any good if the enemy's bombarding the planet's surface from orbit.  That was the whole problem with the Destroid concept in-story, they were designed and built for a land war that was literally never going to come.

[pengbuzz]

On 2/6/2024 at 8:53 PM, Jebe457 said:

In a lot of respects the OG Destroids amounted to Studio Nue, being Studio Nue where like they had done on SBY II they produced a lot more design work than the Production Staff could realistically use.

Most productions has more design work than the production staff can use. Just look at McQuarrie's work for Star Wars or Probert and Sternbach's work for Star Trek.

  

On 2/6/2024 at 8:53 PM, Jebe457 said:

In a lot of respect the rest fill in from there.  Contrary to the usual stereotype SDF:M doesn't portray these platforms as lacking, but it does pretty clearly have issues with integrating them.

 You can't really integrate something into a military that has no place for them to integrate into.

 

On 2/6/2024 at 8:53 PM, Jebe457 said:

If we don't overly focus on the period where the Bubble Economy and related meant Studio Nue's efforts with the Macross didn't really have a budget [read Macross 7]:

• They're acknowledged as a thing in Macross Plus [1994-95], despite that being a short OVA with a big focus on a Pair of Prototype VFs.
  • Mind in turn 1994 is around when Evangelion is creating a splash in part because people are beginning to realize what will come to be called The Lost Decade isn't a short term problem.
• The Macross Zero OVA [2002-2004] makes a point to do significant design work to create the Cheyenne, a reworked prototype Monster, and VF-0 Armored Valkyrie.
• Macross Frontier [2008] then sees them finally get that kind of budget for a TV series where they decide to effectively iterate the Cheyenne/Monster/VF combo.

Macross Zero & Frontier in turn found a balance where the depicted Destroids were purposeful, with their inclusion not being burdensome to Production.  So that's arguably what we're looking at having happened, and that approaching being easier in that regard where SDF:M never quite managed to make it work is why we're liable to see them stick with that.

1) As Seto mentioned: in M+, they're used as targets.

2) Evangelion plays by a different set of rules, where the "Angels" are committing themselves largely to land-based attacks, designed to inflict harm upon humanity. Evangelion is not Macross.

3) Again mentioned by Seto: this is before SW1, when the Unity Government is still thinking the coming conflict will be a land war.

4) The Cheyenne turned out to be about as effective as one would expect in a situation where much of the attacks were aerial. As for the Koenig: it's a big slow valkyrie.

 

On 2/6/2024 at 8:53 PM, Jebe457 said:

Mind in turn that Studio Nue has had a not exactly minor hand in Armored Core Mecha design.

In Armored Core, the piloting is very much ground based with "flight" time in the air being limited to how long the AC can last before its' boosters overheat and it enters "cooldown mode".

 

On 2/6/2024 at 8:53 PM, Jebe457 said:

I would argue Sensible Upgrading the Type-04 line and the Type-07 line is relatively straightforward based on precedence to the VF-11 era, but represent hardware that would be more trouble than their worth for Show Production.

• Tomahawk
  • Basic Generational Tech upgrade evolutions, ala newer computers, actuators, etc.
  • Mount Gatlings alongside the PPGs like the Cheyenne II
  • Rewire the modular shoulder mounts to be able to also handle a pair of head laser analogues.
  • Structure the associated group to have a mix of laser and missile packs on the shoulder mounts to help with doing the equivalent of VFs & Battlepods gunning at incoming missiles.

The obvious problem with this is you're adding a lot of stuff for Show Production to account for in scene planning versus the Cheyenne II, and you wouldn't really get much of an opportunity to use it productively beyond what you get with depicting Cheyenne IIs.

• Defender
  • Basic Generational Tech upgrade evolutions, ala newer computers, actuators, etc.
  • Setup a version that's basically the classic config with the extra hard-points of the official upgrade top/bottom on each arm.
  • Longer range version with the OG quad cannons, and something along the lines of AAM-1 triples per hardpoint.
  • Shorter range version with the Rotaries, and Micro-pods as officially depicted.

Again in Show Production terms this would tend to cause needless scene planning complications versus just using Cheyenne IIs.

• Spartan
  • Basic Generational Tech upgrade evolutions, ala newer computers, actuators, etc.
  • VF-11 style gun pod with integrated bayonet and field swappable magazines.
  • VF-11 style Ballistic Shield, albeit a bit larger with spare mags mounted on the backside as with the VF-11

 

In those scenarios, the destroid is still a sitting target on the ground for space-based forces .

Destroids are, by default, playing in a 2 1/2 D playign field, limited by the fact that while they can shoot up,  they cannot move up. Their opponents however are moving and fighting in 3D, and have those benefits to assist them. And if they really want to be sadistic (and have the time), they can simply run the pilot out of ammo. Sooner or later, gunpods run out of ammo but a Valkyrie can still maneuver and fly. But with Destroids: once their ammo is used up, they are slow and plodding with limited hand to hand ability. 

Also: eventually, armor, shields and structures taking a heavy beating will fail.  Even overtechnology materials has its' limits, especially when pounded on by multiple beams of energy weapons and salvos of high-explosive warheads. "Newer computers, actuators, tech upgrades, etc." can only do so much in a combat environment where the enemy is airborne, has a space navy with starship-grade weaponry, and the forces they're fighting are largely landlocked.

 

On 2/6/2024 at 8:53 PM, Jebe457 said:

The Type-04 as of SW1 could beat the VF-1 in a foot race at 180kph vs. 160 kph, and both the Type-04 and Type-07s already integrated Jump Jet systems.  So a SW1 era VF only has a mobility advantage of the 1/10th of price Destroid if it's in one of the other modes.

Which is exactly what any trained Valkyrie pilot worth their salt is going to stay in for the fight as long as they have to maneuver. As for the "jump jets": the operative word here is "jump", not flight. At best, that will get them into the air for about 15-30 seconds, maybe a minute at most. Meantime, the standard Regult can stay airborne much longer than that.

 

Edited February 9 by pengbuzz
TO my knowledge, all snarkiness removed from post. If I missed anything, please let me know.

[Seto Kaiba]

7 hours ago, pengbuzz said:

In all fairness, you can't integrate something into a military that has no place for them to integrate into. You're basically trying to fight a warship with a tank where it comes to destroids.

To be fair, it's not that there was absolutely no place for Destroids in the postwar New UN Forces.

What ultimately killed the Destroid as a military concept was cost.  The realities of space war stripped the Destroids of their main operating role and their remaining niche of anti-aircraft defense was largely eroded by more cost-effective alternatives like beam CIWS turrets and fixed anti-aircraft missile batteries.  Macross Frontier's Cheyenne II operates in an incredibly specific niche as an air defense platform specifically meant to operate inside an emigrant ship so massive that the possibility of fighting enemy aircraft inside of the ship exists.

As seen in Macross R, at least one emigrant government (Macross Galaxy) has tried to modernize the Series 04 destroids as of 2058.  The problem is that, for all the expensive tech advancements incorporated into designs like the Super Defender, they don't seem to have achieved significantly better performance than the conventional alternatives.

There are, as previously noted, cases where more specialized or exotic Destroid-like mobile weapons did give Valkyries a run for their money in specific circumstances that catered directly to their strengths in the 2050s... but that performance was highly situational.

 

 

7 hours ago, pengbuzz said:

3) Again mentioned by Seto: this is before SW1, when the Unity Government is still thinking the coming conflict will be a land war.

4) The Cheyenne turned out to be about as effective as one would expect in a situation where much of the attacks were aerial.

In the Cheyenne's defense, it was an earlier and less advanced Series 03 model using much less overtechnology than the Series 04 models that were considered the UN Forces first viable Destroid platform.  It was built for war against other Humans more than against something like the Zentradi, and like the VF-0 it did pretty well for what was basically a developmental model being thrown into combat service on short notice.

(Also, let's dial it back a wee bit... the aim is polite discourse.)

 

In hindsight, it's funny how what they described as a potential upgrade for the Tomahawk and Defender is basically the Tomahawk II and Defender EX from Macross II. 

Edited February 7 by Seto Kaiba

[pengbuzz]

41 minutes ago, Seto Kaiba said:

To be fair, it's not that there was absolutely no place for Destroids in the postwar New UN Forces.

What ultimately killed the Destroid as a military concept was cost.  The realities of space war stripped the Destroids of their main operating role and their remaining niche of anti-aircraft defense was largely eroded by more cost-effective alternatives like beam CIWS turrets and fixed anti-aircraft missile batteries.  Macross Frontier's Cheyenne II operates in an incredibly specific niche as an air defense platform specifically meant to operate inside an emigrant ship so massive that the possibility of fighting enemy aircraft inside of the ship exists.

As seen in Macross R, at least one emigrant government (Macross Galaxy) has tried to modernize the Series 04 destroids as of 2058.  The problem is that, for all the expensive tech advancements incorporated into designs like the Super Defender, they don't seem to have achieved significantly better performance than the conventional alternatives.

There are, as previously noted, cases where more specialized or exotic Destroid-like mobile weapons did give Valkyries a run for their money in specific circumstances that catered directly to their strengths in the 2050s... but that performance was highly situational.

 

 

In the Cheyenne's defense, it was an earlier and less advanced Series 03 model using much less overtechnology than the Series 04 models that were considered the UN Forces first viable Destroid platform.  It was built for war against other Humans more than against something like the Zentradi, and like the VF-0 it did pretty well for what was basically a developmental model being thrown into combat service on short notice.

(Also, let's dial it back a wee bit... the aim is polite discourse.)

 

In hindsight, it's funny how what they described as a potential upgrade for the Tomahawk and Defender is basically the Tomahawk II and Defender EX from Macross II. 

My apologies. Sometimes kind of hard for me to tell when my online tone is off; no disrespect intended. Dial turned down to 2.3.

Edited February 7 by pengbuzz