The Mech Debate!

Jordaxia · Post by **Jordaxia** » Fri Oct 15, 2004 12:50 pm

I liked the Jaguar mech in E2150, as well as the rocket launcher tiger, because it reminded me of ED209. The spider was too boxy for my liking, so it's not a favourite of mine. The ED was my favourite side, mind. Orbital plasma cannons and meteor showers are all well and good, but come on. Nukes. Also, they have the laser cannon, and for the few levels before you get shields, you become invincible.

Mekanta · Post by **Mekanta** » Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:22 pm

But you have to admit that the LC can outmaneuver both sides with those hovercraft. ^_^

The LC is unstoppable on island maps.

Kanuckistan · Post by **Kanuckistan** » Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:45 pm

Central Facehuggeria wrote: Stability: Err...Did you just say that lasers have recoil!? Lasers shoot a virtually massless beam of photons at a particular target. Recoil isn't even noticable, as far as I know. (Kanuckistan please correct me if I'm wrong! ) If lasers are defeated by reflective shields, than high yield plasma weapons, particle beams, or just about any other form of decent energy weapon will suffice.

Lasers don't have(noticible) recoil, but plasma and partical weapons do.

Arizona Nova wrote:Dang! My little comment sparked quite the debate! Anyways...

One important consideration to the tank: ammo. If you're packing ginormous 4x120mm cannonz of d00m on your ginormous tank, those four cannons with those huge shells need a lot of space to store a respectable amount of ammunition. The more space it needs to store ammunition, the bigger it gets, the more armor it needs, and the slower it becomes. Whereas, cut to the mech using energy weapons - it might need extensive heat sinks, of course, but as long as the reactor is working it can still shoot. The bigger the main cannon gets, and the less the tank is a tank and it is all the more a mobile artillery piece, which means that it'll get pwned from close range.
Piloting a mech, with the right systems and implants and whatnot, I think would be like piloting a modern jet fighter. Minor AI would control the tedium while the pilot would concentrate on piloting and on blowing stuff up. Y'all need to go and buy a copy of Mechwarrior, jeez.

There you go comparing sci-fi mecha concepts to modern tech tank concepts; you can mount energy weapons on tanks just as readily as mecha, you can stick one guy in a tank with AI support like mecha, and you can redesign a tank's armour scheme to face different evolving threats(it thickening the top armour, etc).

Jangle Jangle Ridge · Post by **Jangle Jangle Ridge** » Fri Oct 15, 2004 8:56 pm

Arizona Nova wrote:Dang! My little comment sparked quite the debate! Anyways...

One important consideration to the tank: ammo. If you're packing ginormous 4x120mm cannonz of d00m on your ginormous tank, those four cannons with those huge shells need a lot of space to store a respectable amount of ammunition. The more space it needs to store ammunition, the bigger it gets, the more armor it needs, and the slower it becomes. Whereas, cut to the mech using energy weapons - it might need extensive heat sinks, of course, but as long as the reactor is working it can still shoot. The bigger the main cannon gets, and the less the tank is a tank and it is all the more a mobile artillery piece, which means that it'll get pwned from close range.
Piloting a mech, with the right systems and implants and whatnot, I think would be like piloting a modern jet fighter. Minor AI would control the tedium while the pilot would concentrate on piloting and on blowing stuff up. Y'all need to go and buy a copy of Mechwarrior, jeez.

Yeah... but then, instead of mounting a conventional cannon on my tank, I mount it with energy weapons. I mean, really. I don't have to put conventional cannons on a tank, it's just what happens today.

Skeelzania · Post by **Skeelzania** » Fri Oct 15, 2004 10:20 pm

The problem with energy or railgun weapons in general though is that you can't shoot over the horizon, which DOES support the mech argument, since their horizon IS a little farther. Of course, conventional artillery or missiles on a tank is both cheaper and more efficent.

Underwater Asylum · Post by **Underwater Asylum** » Sat Oct 16, 2004 2:13 am

Well, if you have mecha, give'em an arced fire solid shell cannon. Works like a railgun, in principle, but is more clumsy. Make the shell go real quick and... Ouch.

Jangle Jangle Ridge · Post by **Jangle Jangle Ridge** » Sat Oct 16, 2004 3:20 am

Underwater Asylum wrote:Well, if you have mecha, give'em an arced fire solid shell cannon. Works like a railgun, in principle, but is more clumsy. Make the shell go real quick and... Ouch.

That ouch was the mech falling over, for all you listeners out there...

Underwater Asylum · Post by **Underwater Asylum** » Sat Oct 16, 2004 5:06 am

'bout right, JJR. However, if you could stabilise said mech..

Five Civilized Nations · Sat Oct 16, 2004 2:16 pm

Like having four legs instead of two...

Mekanta · Post by **Mekanta** » Sat Oct 16, 2004 3:15 pm

Ultimate compromise: Somethin' like the Sentinals (Squiddies) from the Matrix. (Which my Akujin are loosely based on.)

They have a reletively low target profile, they're stable, they can pack serious heat, (Hey, those lasers were still pretty primative. They took up a lot of space.) and they can fight melee. Something tanks can't do.