NationStates Jolt Archive

I recently looked at giant mecha and think a good, diverse mixture from various cooperations and decided to see if giant mecha would be great for FT use. All original, nothing from Gundam.

Mostly humanoid, but some varients, most would be between 150-200ft tall.

Would this be a good idea?

You have no idea what you've started, my friend. Some people here have very strong opinions on the practical use of mecha, one way or the other.

Well serious use yes... but they are powerful too! :)

There are alot of weaknesses to Mechs. Joints are lightly armored of necessity, you can't have as much armor thickness because of greater surface area of a mech versus a tank. They have much higher profiles than any but the largest monster tanks(SheVa, Bolo, variants thereof). Balance.

I'd say the weaknesses outweigh the benefits personally. I prefer Powered Armor and tanks, moree mobile, and able to carry weapons heavy enough to deal with the lighter armored Mechs. Course, they're fun to look at, but realistically speaking, they're meat.

Personally, I feel that a fully mecha army would make for either poor or difficult rp when interacting with players who fielded non-200ft robot armies. I suppose that methods could be devised to counter them, but as my own tactics would simply involve large numbers of self-propelled capital-class turbolasers, rp would still be limited when compared to the 'personal' aspect of infantry or tank warfare.

That said, the option is always open, and it is ultimately your choice alone.

...realistically speaking, they're meat.

That too.

I'll give ya that, although the power of a Mech is great to for lots of heavy work that my planet is known for and where tanks won't be willing to go with huge trees that dwarf the rainforest ones.

Or should I stick with scaled down combat suits?

Mecha if used correctly can be a powerfull assets. But thier are some who still view FT. as a time where hydralics are still used to operate the joint systems, which could work in the wieghtlessness of space but on a planet the job would be almost impossible.. which makes thier argument vaild only with that form of powered movment. Some others like Hobbeebia Biomechs use a form of Electromagnetic pulse system which makes moving easy in space and and a planet.

Agreed, these would primarly be space Mecha, but I can't call them ships really. Its a pilot controlled weapon system that is a glorified combat suit that gives our people natural movement in space, but one serious hit will fry the systems.

Since our planet has an abundance of rich life and lots of science and knowledge (valuing knowledge over military power) we have/are (not posted) developed some substances to asborb radiation, heat and act as new conductors.

Example:

Arthos
This translucent, unreflective substance is lavender. It is very light. It is extremely inflexible in solid form. This material has a slick texture in solid form. This material's melting point is very high. This substance is conductive.


So if possible I'm looking for planet use ones to.

Eraclea']I'll give ya that, although the power of a Mech is great to for lots of heavy work that my planet is known for and where tanks won't be willing to go with huge trees that dwarf the rainforest ones.

Or should I stick with scaled down combat suits?

I would advise combat suits(think ACS or Powered Armor). It's less likely to draw bitching, and you can have more of them. If you consider the most famous example of Mechs, they were extremely rare, and EXPENSIVE. Battlemechs are always stupidly expensive. They're cool, but expensive, and unwieldy.

So 6-9ft powered suits for our forces? Those would give an edge right on close combat with stronger protection then regular FT gear? (Let's say Starwars level gear.)

Eraclea']So 6-9ft powered suits for our forces? Those would give an edge right on close combat with stronger protection then regular FT gear? (Let's say Starwars level gear.)

All the armors I'm used to are sized to the person wearing them, or slightly larger. I'd say 6-9ft would be the max for a human or human-sized ET.

I can still put mecha weaponry into them right? Like a shoulder cannon or a super sniper rifle meant for blowing up enemy tanks or convoys? With maybe depleted uranium rounds?

See, you've got the scale all wrong. Either go with tiny suits that are more power armor or giant, giant Titan-like things that can lay waste to entire cities in a single shot. I want nothing less than 1 km in height!

Note that these are my personal opinions of what sized mech-like things are cool. Go realistic or go WH40K, but there's nothing in between you won't be derided for by some people. Well, the 40K stuff will get you derided by some, but still..... things that big are cool.

Eraclea']I can still put mecha weaponry into them right? Like a shoulder cannon or a super sniper rifle meant for blowing up enemy tanks or convoys? With maybe depleted uranium rounds?

DU is not the big bad bullet of FT. Pick the wankmetal of your choice. My preference is Chromsten.

Pick a big energy weapon of some description. Some people freown on plasma as a weapon, so that's a wash. Go with a big PBC or laser of some type for antitank work. Pick a projectile weapon for general antipersonnel work. I say an EM projectile(railgu/gauss rifle), or similar.

*Drools*

I love these threads. Absolutely love them. I get to yell at people. ;) Of course, at the moment, I'm tired from work and have several other things to write. So, I'll postpone your tongue lashing until later, shall I?

Two Words.

Titan.

Legion.

Two Words.

Titan.

Legion.

Hehehe. Titans BAD. Me no like play with Titans!

Well...I don't have that element and I am too low on the FT scale yet. Still developing after all. :)

Read up on the AMBAC system developed for mobile suits. It makes them the perfect space superiority unit.

I would suggest sticking to smaller mechs for land combat, like Destroids from Macross, or even light - medium class mechs from Battletech.

And that can't be used on, say, a fighter, WHY? Add to the fact that it STILL uses reaction mass, it's really not any more efficient than thrusters. In fact, less so, as thrusters can be used as offensive weapons. Oh, that and the expense and waste of space of adding such a system instead of corrective thrusters.

Alright, that sounds good, thanks.

Only thing is though, for developing the technology it will probably take 20-30 NS years right?

And that can't be used on, say, a fighter, WHY? Add to the fact that it STILL uses reaction mass, it's really not any more efficient than thrusters. In fact, less so, as thrusters can be used as offensive weapons. Oh, that and the expense and waste of space of adding such a system instead of corrective thrusters.

It can't be used on a fighter due to the fact that the fighter doesn't have LIMBS. The only ones that do are Valkyries from Macross, and that's because they're variable fighters.

The AMBAC system was meant specifically to deal with weight transferring throughout the mobile suit. Read the whole article first before you jump to say something.

I did. And yes, it could indeed be used on fighters. Simply make it variable geometry, like many carrier-launched craft. Just turn a wing and viola- you've changed direction. And it's STILL more inefficient than a thruster, what with the more moving parts and the lack of offensive ability.

Watch an episode of 0083 Stardust memory, then tell me that their offensive capabilities are crap.

Seriously, a mobile suit is like having a space helicopter. It can move virtually any direction without having to turn. A mobile suit is covered in verniers and thrusters. The only downside is that a single mobile suit has a fuel limit of 15 minutes, and then relies on the verniers to adjust its position.

Plus, the average 180 degree rotation time is 1.2 seconds. I don't think a TIE fighter or any other fighter could do that.

Really, bad anime isn't a good source for how well something would perform. Hell, it'd increase it's flight time by a small amount just by moving to actual thrusters for turning. The sheer amount of energy wasted due to friction with the silly AMBACs system. Just throwing shit out the opposite direction is a much more efficient use of reaction mass.

A mobile suit is covered in verniers and thrusters.
And your average spacedy fighter couldn't be.... why?

I don't think a TIE fighter or any other fighter could do that.
And you call a TIE a good example of engineering skills? It's got two engines, a massive profile, especially from the flanks, and a remarkably inefficient system for supplying it with power. Add on the fact that its arcs of fire and view are limited by its massive wings, and it's an engineering disaster.

Okay, maybe a TIE was a bad example. Let's see. Let's take an Excalibur Heavy Fighter from Wing Commander. Now, imagine if it had the AMBAC system. Y'know what I visualize? A fighter stuck trying to correct its trajectory.

Now, verniers? Yes, I could see that being used. Hell, the G-Fighter and the Core Booster from the first Gundam series used them, and very efficiently. Sayla took out well over fifty Zeon suits on her own with that thing.

However, the one crucial thing that the AMBAC system requires is LIMBS. That's what transfers the weight. That's what makes it capable of rotating 180 degrees in nearly a second. A fighter couldn't do that. Its main thrusters keep it going forward, so the weighet transfer would just cause it to spin out of control.

Well, at least the FIRST Gundam series acknowledges the superiority of dedicated craft then...


However, the one crucial thing that the AMBAC system requires is LIMBS. That's what transfers the weight. That's what makes it capable of rotating 180 degrees in nearly a second. A fighter couldn't do that. Its main thrusters keep it going forward, so the weighet transfer would just cause it to spin out of control.
Riiiiight. Now, tell me why the thing can't turn its thrusters off? You know, the opposite of on? Hell, even Gundams have to obey the basic laws of physics here. Oh, wait. It's a crappy anime. No they don't. In all seriousness though, Newton's first law. An object in motion tends to stay in motion. Changing your facing does jack unless you then manage to stop yourself and accelerate in the other direction.

so the weighet transfer would just cause it to spin out of control.
And this is different from AMBAC... how?

Wow, you really fall into the category of anti-fanchild. You always have to bash on something when you post.

Anyways, mobile suits never have their thrusters on for very long. They have to constantly change direction to compensate for the battle.

Y'know what would really help to explain this? Try finding the intro sequence for MSG: Encounters in Space. If shows you exactly how a mobile suit works, and how well it can work against its own type, plus battleships and fighters.

It's mostly that Gundam isn't even that good of a show. Brightly colored, often silly looking, mecha, unoriginal and one-dimensional characters, and the same-old same-old "wunderkind saves the day" bullcrap that's been VASTLY overused in nearly all anime of the genre. And did I mention the fact that they feel they need to make fifty series of essentially the same old thing? I'll stick with good shows like Trinity Blood and Yami No Matsuei, thank you very much.


Y'know what would really help to explain this? Try finding the intro sequence for MSG: Encounters in Space. If shows you exactly how a mobile suit works, and how well it can work against its own type, plus battleships and fighters.
Again, bad anime shows =/= physics. After all, I can make a show where a single man in a Fokker takes down a few hundred Eurofighters in one go. Could it be cool? If done well, sure, why not. Could it actually happen? God no.


Anyways, mobile suits never have their thrusters on for very long. They have to constantly change direction to compensate for the battle.

In a real battle, unlikely. With c-frac projectiles and energy weapons, battles SHOULD be occuring at ranges not much less than a lightsecond (well, fighters at least. Cap ships should be at a good deal farther away, IMHO). Turning would be night useless much of the time.

You always have to bash on something when you post.
Don't like it? Tough. The truth hurts, don't it? Mecha are cool, but are inherently inferior to dedicated fighters.

Actually, the whole bashing thing makes you look foolish, at best. Yes, I understand physics, and I take all laws of physics into account.

However, I only see your arguements as some way to downplay mecha because you think it's stupid in all aspects.

Oh, and I get the fact that Gundam's plotline is overdone. I'm actually quite disappointed about it. And no, they're not all the same. In 0083, no one wins. In the end, Operation Stardust is completed and the colony drop blows another gaping hole into the planet. Zeta Gundam, although Kamille beats Scirocco, Kamille still dies and Axis takes over Earth. And let's look at F91. Granted, it was poorly put together because they turned a 50 episode series into a two hour movie, but the Crossbone Vanguard still wins. And I don't even recognize SEED as a legitamate Gundam series.

Fine. Please explain how I'm wrong. Explain why the inefficient AMBAC system is superior to using simple thrusters scattered across the hull. Explain why AMBACs when used with a variable wing craft won't work, even with the same computer coordinating everything so it actually works. Explain exactly why it needs it, when dodging is out of the question in this era and nothing should be moving past you anyway due to absurd effective ranges on c-frac weaponry and light speed DEWs. Explain how an absurdly expensive, absurdly complicated craft such as a Gundam, complete with such useless limbs as legs of all things, can hope to defeat a sleek, more heavily armored, longer lasting, faster, more heavily armed craft such as a space superiority fighter. Because so far, you've done little to attack my arguments, only attack the fact that I don't like the rather poorly done series that your poster children come from.

Have you ever been sky-diving? I have. Lemme explain to you how this relates to the topic of the AMBAC system.

You understand how the inner ear is the human's source of balance, correct? Well, the AMBAC system recreates that, allowing the mobile suit to move like a human does.

Now, when in free-fall, a human being is capable of adjusting their weight and spinning. However, at the same time, the human may choose whether or not they want to stop spinning by adjusting their weight back in the opposite direction, stopping the spin eventually. This also applies in space, but on an infinite level. However, with the mobile suit's use of verniers, it is capable of doing what the human does, but more efficiently because it uses the verniers to stop faster than the human is capable of with just their normal limbs and joints.

A fighter lacks this capability, having only linear folding wings in some designs (i.e. F-14 Tomcat). The fighter would require the use of thrusters to recreate this effect, which is fuel-deficient.

You are right, however. The legs are unnecessary. They're mostly cosmetic, as shown with the Zeong of the first series. It was capable of doing exactly what a mobile suit could, but the addition of legs multiplies this effect by two, making a normal mobile suit's reaction time slightly faster.

Now, in conjunction with that of the panoramic monitor display (ref. Mobile suits of Gundam F91), the pilot has a faster reaction time than a fighter pilot, because the fighter pilot is relying on a radar to tell them where the enemy is, and then they check for it. However, with the bulk of the machine blocking your view behind you and your incapability of seeing below you without barrel-rolling, you have to constantly guess.

The panoramic monitor display negates that, allowing your a full 360 degree field of view. With cameras mounted on every part of the body, you could look behind, below, above, left, right, and straight ahead with no obstructions other than the environment you're in.

Wow, you really fall into the category of anti-fanchild. You always have to bash on something when you post.

Anyways, mobile suits never have their thrusters on for very long. They have to constantly change direction to compensate for the battle.

Y'know what would really help to explain this? Try finding the intro sequence for MSG: Encounters in Space. If shows you exactly how a mobile suit works, and how well it can work against its own type, plus battleships and fighters.

Is this it?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbJko0fSuXU

Eraclea']Is this it?

Whatever you just tried to post didn't come out. Try again.

Whatever you just tried to post didn't come out. Try again.

Fixed it. ^^

Smacked the top of the nail directly, Eraclea.:D

Smacked the top of the nail directly, Eraclea.:D

It seems as if they have a lot of movement, but you have to be using dummy weapons, which would be interesting, because no nation without effective smart weapons are effectively reduced to gundam level technology right?

Exactly. You see, mobile sutis are very effective against themselves and fighter when egaging at range. However, when engaging capital ships, they have to be buzzing around them like angry hornets, because that's what distracts the enemy long enough for your own capital ships to take them down.

With the addition of close combat weapons to mobile suits, however, the mobile suits became more effective against them in their own right, making them the most feared weapon or war during this era.

In space, I use mecha. However, my space mecha see more construction duty than combat duty. Also, the fact that their propulsion is gravitic based makes mine as nimble as any space fighter. Thus, if I ever decide to have space combat mecha, I'll have a solid base.

As for on the ground, I do use tanks, general infantry, artillary, A.P.C.s, et cetera. However, I also have ground, sea, and air mecha to suppliment them. But, I don't use them exclusively for ground combat unless there is no other choice.

That was cool, but still beside the point. After all, who puts bigger guns on a fighter than they do on a fragging battleship? Or armor, for that matter. I mean, really, when you have a battleship sized reactor, you'd think you'd outdo that on the Gundam by an awful lot... Now, back on topic.


A fighter lacks this capability, having only linear folding wings in some designs (i.e. F-14 Tomcat). The fighter would require the use of thrusters to recreate this effect, which is fuel-deficient.
Pardon? Conservation of Energy counters this point nicely. Thrusters, which work by throwing a very small amount of mass at incredibly high speed, are FAR more efficient than the massive mechanisms required for an AMBAC system, which require the same amount of energy to turn the thing (as turning is indeed a form of acceleration, which requires energy), with far more internal space wasted and far more energy lost to friction. Thus, fighter sans AMBAC wins in this department.


The panoramic monitor display negates that, allowing your a full 360 degree field of view. With cameras mounted on every part of the body, you could look behind, below, above, left, right, and straight ahead with no obstructions other than the environment you're in.
And why, pray tell, couldn't you use this on a fighter?

Now, let's go over the dozens of other reasons mecha are inferior.

Firstly, volume to surface area. By nature, a mecha will have FAR more surface area than an equivilantly sized fighter, due to its bizarre shape when compared to the more boxlike one of a fighter (or tubular in the case of Otagian craft). This means that far more mass must be tacked on in order to adequately defend the thing. This leads to point two quite nicely.

Mecha will always be slower than equivilantly sized fighters. This is due to A) their higher mass, and B) their low amount of contiguous volume. Engines and reactors tend to require large amounts of space in a rather blocklike shape. Fighters will, by nature, have much more of this sort of space available, not to mention devoid of the inanely complex mechanisms required to move arms and legs. Thus, with all other things being equal, the power generated by the mecha will be lower, and will be used to move a far greater mass.

Thirdly, fighters will always be more heavily armed than mecha. This is due (again) to their larger contigous volume, which allows larger weapons, along with their lack of fragile joints, which can easily be torn apart by recoil.

I'll make a few more points later, but right now, I must go out to dinner. Amusing that this is the night I'm going for sushi...

In my book, mecha is Japanese for “ignore”.

@Otagia: Did you skip over my post for a reason? Or is it you just didn't have time to review my points I made?

IMHO, I've figured a way past that technological barrier you seem to think seperates space fighters and space combat mecha. Using it, it is my opinion, that any space combat mecha I decide to create in the future will be on equal footing with many currently used FT fighters (IMHO, far superior actually, if you recall that 90% of all FT space fighters used on NS are SW based).

In my book, mecha is Japanese for “ignore”.

Actually, I don't believe it is a Japanese word at all. TBH, I think its supposed to be short-hand.

Of course, as I know only a smattering of RL Japanese words, I may be wrong.

@Otagia: Did you skip over my post for a reason? Or is it you just didn't have time to review my points I made?

IMHO, I've figured a way past that technological barrier you seem to think seperates space fighters and space combat mecha. Using it, it is my opinion, that any space combat mecha I decide to create in the future will be on equal footing with many currently used FT fighters (IMHO, far superior actually, if you recall that 90% of all FT space fighters used on NS are SW based).
If you have a way around the problems I've listed, I'd love to hear it (as I am actually of the mind that mecha are cool, it's just that they're bloody useless). As for ignoring your post, it wasn't up at the time I was writing it. Of course, one could just argue that gravitic propulsion takes just as much energy as any other sort (you DO have to make that gravity well somehow, you know), meaning that the fighter is still ahead in that department, as it mounts larger generators and engines, allowing it to project a stronger gravity well for longer

Anyway, I really must be going. I haven't had inari for ages, and this is one of the few places in town that actually serves the stuff. And their eel... Look, I've drooled all over my keyboard. See what you made me do? ;)

That was cool, but still beside the point. After all, who puts bigger guns on a fighter than they do on a fragging battleship? Or armor, for that matter. I mean, really, when you have a battleship sized reactor, you'd think you'd outdo that on the Gundam by an awful lot... Now, back on topic.

Meh, size isn't everything. Remember, its quality that counts, not damn quantity.

Pardon? Conservation of Energy counters this point nicely. Thrusters, which work by throwing a very small amount of mass at incredibly high speed, are FAR more efficient than the massive mechanisms required for an AMBAC system, which require the same amount of energy to turn the thing (as turning is indeed a form of acceleration, which requires energy), with far more internal space wasted and far more energy lost to friction. Thus, fighter sans AMBAC wins in this department.

WTF does any of that even have to do with space combat? Atmospheric and ground combat, sure, but I don't see the validity in space.

Ever consider that the limbs could allow for multi-targeting abilities?

And why, pray tell, couldn't you use this on a fighter?

TBH, even with that, a pilot would still have to move around. Thus, where you going to find room to put something like that on a fighter sized craft?

Now, let's go over the dozens of other reasons mecha are inferior.

Mecha hater. Is it just because you aren't able to come up with one that works with your tech that you don't like them?

Firstly, volume to surface area. By nature, a mecha will have FAR more surface area than an equivilantly sized fighter, due to its bizarre shape when compared to the more boxlike one of a fighter (or tubular in the case of Otagian craft). This means that far more mass must be tacked on in order to adequately defend the thing. This leads to point two quite nicely.

More surface area = more area for shield emitters, weapon emplacements, armor, et cetera.

And when the hell did mass have anything to do with space combat? There is no damn gravity to act upon it to create weight.

Mecha will always be slower than equivilantly sized fighters. This is due to A) their higher mass, and B) their low amount of contiguous volume. Engines and reactors tend to require large amounts of space in a rather blocklike shape. Fighters will, by nature, have much more of this sort of space available, not to mention devoid of the inanely complex mechanisms required to move arms and legs. Thus, with all other things being equal, the power generated by the mecha will be lower, and will be used to move a far greater mass.

Untrue. Utilizing my current technology, my space construction mecha are faster and more agile than any old SW fighter.

And still, you keep yapping about mass. Explain how mass has any damn thing to do with space combat.

You forget that some nations can fit far more in smaller spaces what lesser nations could. You still forget its quality over quantity.

Thirdly, fighters will always be more heavily armed than mecha. This is due (again) to their larger contigous volume, which allows larger weapons, along with their lack of fragile joints, which can easily be torn apart by recoil.

A.) Its god-damn space. NO RECOIL!
B.) To get a larger volume, a fighter would have to be the size of a freaking star ship.
C.) Still with the 'bigger is better' philosphy. Its QUALITY that actually matters. Its not the size of the gun that counts, its the amount of damage it can do.

I'll make a few more points later, but right now, I must go out to dinner. Amusing that this is the night I'm going for sushi...

Meh. Mecha hater.

That was cool, but still beside the point. After all, who puts bigger guns on a fighter than they do on a fragging battleship? Or armor, for that matter. I mean, really, when you have a battleship sized reactor, you'd think you'd outdo that on the Gundam by an awful lot... Now, back on topic.


Pardon? Conservation of Energy counters this point nicely. Thrusters, which work by throwing a very small amount of mass at incredibly high speed, are FAR more efficient than the massive mechanisms required for an AMBAC system, which require the same amount of energy to turn the thing (as turning is indeed a form of acceleration, which requires energy), with far more internal space wasted and far more energy lost to friction. Thus, fighter sans AMBAC wins in this department.


And why, pray tell, couldn't you use this on a fighter?

Now, let's go over the dozens of other reasons mecha are inferior.

Firstly, volume to surface area. By nature, a mecha will have FAR more surface area than an equivilantly sized fighter, due to its bizarre shape when compared to the more boxlike one of a fighter (or tubular in the case of Otagian craft). This means that far more mass must be tacked on in order to adequately defend the thing. This leads to point two quite nicely.

Mecha will always be slower than equivilantly sized fighters. This is due to A) their higher mass, and B) their low amount of contiguous volume. Engines and reactors tend to require large amounts of space in a rather blocklike shape. Fighters will, by nature, have much more of this sort of space available, not to mention devoid of the inanely complex mechanisms required to move arms and legs. Thus, with all other things being equal, the power generated by the mecha will be lower, and will be used to move a far greater mass.

Thirdly, fighters will always be more heavily armed than mecha. This is due (again) to their larger contigous volume, which allows larger weapons, along with their lack of fragile joints, which can easily be torn apart by recoil.

I'll make a few more points later, but right now, I must go out to dinner. Amusing that this is the night I'm going for sushi...

Well maybe you don't think so, but a Mecha could hold more power then a fighter, and maybe even faster. If you recall Han Solo's boasting of his MF outrunning capital ships. In space everything is relative, but its the larger engines (Larger thrust to mass ratio) that allows the larger objects to travel faster.

As for power, if they are running 350 kwh laser swords and they have powerful shields and heavy armor plating, chances are the weapons are builting into those 'cosmetic' legs, or their purpose could be for fuel and extra ammo storage.

Your arguement that a same size fighter would have more power and be overall better then a mech. The problem is that 50 or 60 men that could replace a tank would indeed be more powerful, but it doesn't mean that they will be capable of beating it.

Fighters are strong, but have little armor and although nimble, they have very little weaponry, mostly powerful lasers and maybe a few torpedos or other missiles. Mecha are designed to unleash absolute hell in comparison. Fighters are essentially distractions, while a Mech is the equivolent of a tank in WWII. Its very presence is a threat. Its big, its bulky and it will blow your head right off if you are in its way.

An equal amount of mass in anything comparable to a fighter (or rather any search and destroy weapon) will initially seem like a poor choice. However if you are strong enough that those fighters are not a large threat (even in cases of being outnumbered 5 to 1) the Mech or whatever will win.

Capital ships are not known for their overwhelming power, but their overwhelming defense and ability to take a major thrashing. Dreadnoughts are known for their ability to dish it out, but can't take it.

Mechs serve a purpose, but they do seem to be the top if their is no smart weapons that will be useful. Otherwise it would fall apart. :)

If you have a way around the problems I've listed, I'd love to hear it (as I am actually of the mind that mecha are cool, it's just that they're bloody useless). As for ignoring your post, it wasn't up at the time I was writing it. Of course, one could just argue that gravitic propulsion takes just as much energy as any other sort (you DO have to make that gravity well somehow, you know), meaning that the fighter is still ahead in that department, as it mounts larger generators and engines, allowing it to project a stronger gravity well for longer

Anyway, I really must be going. I haven't had inari for ages, and this is one of the few places in town that actually serves the stuff. And their eel... Look, I've drooled all over my keyboard. See what you made me do? ;)
Meh, alright, I'll give you that.

TBH, using old (IC'ly speaking for SQ) Quantum/Gravitic Reactors based on canon B5 tech (they are essentially artificial singularities created using gravitic compression instead of infinite mass), I can fit any size craft with one. Hell, even a modern day (well, Vietnam War era technically) Jeep could be equipped with one. Hell, I don't even have to use a gravitic power source. My AP Cores also come in many sizes. Then there are the good old fashioned fusion reactors (even have one that supposedly would have an infinite life span when used on space faring vessels).

Current SQian tech has advanced to the point where a F-16 could be built that looked exactly like the original, but carried enough arms and armour to defeat an X-Wing in a dog-fight in deep space (basically the concept behind my old Raptor and Dark Angel class fighters).

I've used Gravitic technology since day 1 on NS, thus, IMHO, SQ should be one hell of an IC expert on the stuff. IC'ly, SQ has also advanced to the point where the ships are works-of-art and still arse-kicking machines. Even my current armor layers could be shrunk down to fit on a mecha.

TBH, with gravitic technology, gravitic joints for mecha would work wonders. You know, that gives me an idea.

This is also FT, so super-uber-frictionless-fluid for standard joints is well in the realm of possibility. Basing FT tech so closely on old RL stuff isn't beneficial to FT, IMHO. Just because we can't do it now doesn't mean we can't do it in, say, a few centuries.

Eraclea']
Capital ships are not known for their overwhelming power, but their overwhelming defense and ability to take a major thrashing. Dreadnoughts are known for their ability to dish it out, but can't take it.

What world are you living in? One where people design and use terrible, terrible vessels? Dreadnoughts are just bigger capital ships with more guns. Both are covered in masses of armor, both mount enough weapons to slag a planet. Capital ships are known for their overwhelming power as well as defence, and the same goes for dreadnoughts. They're just bigger.

(See, the entire point of a dreadnought is that it's not scared of anything, offensively or defensively. Thus the "dread" "nought". As in doesn't dread anything.)

My vote still remains only for Titan Legions, for all other forms reek of bad anime and hatred by established RPers. Yet Titan Legions are known to be teh own by everyone. :)

Eraclea']Well maybe you don't think so, but a Mecha could hold more power then a fighter, and maybe even faster. If you recall Han Solo's boasting of his MF outrunning capital ships. In space everything is relative, but its the larger engines (Larger thrust to mass ratio) that allows the larger objects to travel faster.

IMHO, that only holds true if you use Newtonian physics based engines. I don't.

As for power, if they are running 350 kwh laser swords and they have powerful shields and heavy armor plating, chances are the weapons are builting into those 'cosmetic' legs, or their purpose could be for fuel and extra ammo storage.

TBH, it would be better if you came up with your own tech versions instead of relying so closely to canon.

Your arguement that a same size fighter would have more power and be overall better then a mech. The problem is that 50 or 60 men that could replace a tank would indeed be more powerful, but it doesn't mean that they will be capable of beating it.

Use the right tech, and a mecha could best a less-advanced, same-size fighter.

Fighters are strong, but have little armor and although nimble, they have very little weaponry, mostly powerful lasers and maybe a few torpedos or other missiles. Mecha are designed to unleash absolute hell in comparison. Fighters are essentially distractions, while a Mech is the equivolent of a tank in WWII. Its very presence is a threat. Its big, its bulky and it will blow your head right off if you are in its way.

Relatively speaking. Rely to much on mecha, and you will be pwned. TBH, if you insist on using canon mecha tech, my fighters could run rings around your canon mecha.

An equal amount of mass in anything comparable to a fighter (or rather any search and destroy weapon) will initially seem like a poor choice. However if you are strong enough that those fighters are not a large threat (even in cases of being outnumbered 5 to 1) the Mech or whatever will win.

Not necessarily. Against one of my fighters, your canon mecha would just have a hard time keeping up, let alone being fast enough to get a target lock.

Just because its uber in canon, doesn't mean its uber on NS. Remember, NS is a melting pot of different canons and tech bases.

Capital ships are not known for their overwhelming power, but their overwhelming defense and ability to take a major thrashing. Dreadnoughts are known for their ability to dish it out, but can't take it.

Still relying to much on canon. My cap ships can dish it out quite well while still being able to take one HELL of a pounding.

Mechs serve a purpose, but they do seem to be the top if their is no smart weapons that will be useful. Otherwise it would fall apart. :)

Once again, I must reiterate this simple fact:

Don't rely so much on canon. In the world of NS, that will get you pwned real quick.

What world are you living in? One where people design and use terrible, terrible vessels? Dreadnoughts are just bigger capital ships with more guns. Both are covered in masses of armor, both mount enough weapons to slag a planet. Capital ships are known for their overwhelming power as well as defence, and the same goes for dreadnoughts. They're just bigger.

(See, the entire point of a dreadnought is that it's not scared of anything, offensively or defensively. Thus the "dread" "nought". As in doesn't dread anything.)

My vote still remains only for Titan Legions, for all other forms reek of bad anime and hatred by established RPers. Yet Titan Legions are known to be teh own by everyone. :)

IMHO, a mecha derived off of a canon one (like I use for my ground and air mecha) is fine, as long as you aren't too reliant on canon for it.

As for your uber sized mecha fetish, that's not always better. Smaller mecha, like mine, could outmanuver that behemoth and take it out from multiple angles before it could get a target lock on one. Smaller units also means you can build and field far more of them.

And when the hell did mass have anything to do with space combat? There is no damn gravity to act upon it to create weight.
And still, you keep yapping about mass. Explain how mass has any damn thing to do with space combat.

Learn some physics. Mass doesn't change no matter how much gravity is acting upon an object. Only the removal or addition of matter can change the mass of an object. Mass is the measure of matter in an object.


A.) Its god-damn space. NO RECOIL!
Just because there is no gravity does not mean Newton's Third goes out the window. If something is pushed, it will pushed back. And I noticed you said "I don't use Newtonian physics". Well, that means either you godmode (likely) or none of you thrusters work, since all thrusters rely on the Third Law to work.

Understand?

Meh, size isn't everything. Remember, its quality that counts, not damn quantity.

Yes... which I think these SW freaks go on about. It doesn't matter if you can wipe every single one of them away with one smart bomb/missile barrage if you have zomg1000000fighters! Well too bad SW fans, it does. A SW fighter is CHEAP, these things are like bicycles I bet!

All of Star Wars Tech lacks smart weaponry, I dunno why, it just does. In reality they'd be destroyed in a single second.



WTF does any of that even have to do with space combat? Atmospheric and ground combat, sure, but I don't see the validity in space.

Ever consider that the limbs could allow for multi-targeting abilities?

Just going for efficency. Though Mechs would be able to hold out far longer on from mass because they can turn the heat into electricity also inside them. Direct heat-to-energy. :) On a planet the Mechs would be weaker, but they will still be able to hold up, some of these fighters I see look so fragile they'd burn up if they even tried reentry. A mech is known for surviving reentry btw...just not well.



TBH, even with that, a pilot would still have to move around. Thus, where you going to find room to put something like that on a fighter sized craft?

Exactly, fighters are small and weak, but numerous. Doing so would make costs too high to spam.



Mecha hater. Is it just because you aren't able to come up with one that works with your tech that you don't like them? Many SW and other techs have versions of mecha, but they opt for driods....too bad they are more likely to spam driods then mecha. If you remember SW Episode II, General Grievous was basically a being in a mech. He absolutely owned the Jedi to. His strength, speed, and power was magnified unbelievably to match his force abilities. Now imagine if every Jedi had the high-tech advantages, insane speed and power and also the protection of a mech? It would be epic fights, but they wouldn't go for it tbh.

Physical augmentation suits are mecha btw. Mecha aren't just warmachines either. :)



More surface area = more area for shield emitters, weapon emplacements, armor, et cetera.
Yep. :)

And when the hell did mass have anything to do with space combat? There is no damn gravity to act upon it to create weight.

Refering to Einstein on this one, more mass means more energy to make it faster, too bad this is relative and the large engines in mecha are usually much larger and more powerful then a fighters, and they also run ALL the weapons on the Mech, while a fighter can usually only do one thing at a time.


Untrue. Utilizing my current technology, my space construction mecha are faster and more agile than any old SW fighter.
SW = the kindergarteners choice of FT ships. In RL a Tie Fighter would have its butt destroyed by a cruise missile before it even gets in range to its target.


And still, you keep yapping about mass. Explain how mass has any damn thing to do with space combat. Again his stupid Einstienin ideas.

You forget that some nations can fit far more in smaller spaces what lesser nations could. You still forget its quality over quantity. Ya... wonder how SW missed the nano-tech era tbh. Considering we can almost do that now. Small size, big threat. :) Or more crap in less space! :D



A.) Its god-damn space. NO RECOIL!
B.) To get a larger volume, a fighter would have to be the size of a freaking star ship.
C.) Still with the 'bigger is better' philosphy. Its QUALITY that actually matters. Its not the size of the gun that counts, its the amount of damage it can do.


A. There is a recoil, but it won't be too powerful as on Earth, where the recoil turns into sound which can give away your position to EVERYONE and make you an easy target, but Mecha essentially have no recoil to worry about with their building. A fighter has more to worry about then a mech from using lasers. Only thing which would hurt a mech is using an incredibly large gun that is not meant for a mech of whatever type.

B. Large fighters aren't fighters anymore. They are usually even easier targets to.

C. Exactly. If I shot you with a bunch of BBs you'd be pissed, if I shot you with a Magnum or a .50 cal you'd be dead. The power and damage of the gun ALWAYS is proportionate to the size and power of the wielder, and let's just face the facts, no Fighter will have the power to punch through a Capital Ship or Battlecruiser on its own. Mecha fall into a Cruiser type basically, and the most powerful are essentially dreadnoughts. They can deal MASSIVE damage with these huge weapons that no fighter can equip. However on the scale, the fleet ships in Gundam are not near Star Destroyer Size, but that's relative. A Gundam-mech would destroy a Star Destroyer in about 30 seconds, they just don't have the mobility to match the power of a nimble mech about 1/200th there size (or less) and SW shields are relative to, based on power to surface area of the blade on a Gundam (350 kw) it doesn't seem like a Star Wars ship was ever anticipating such a piercing blow, and if they were asborbing the heat they could not stop a Gundam from smashing through it. :)

What world are you living in? One where people design and use terrible, terrible vessels? Dreadnoughts are just bigger capital ships with more guns. Both are covered in masses of armor, both mount enough weapons to slag a planet. Capital ships are known for their overwhelming power as well as defence, and the same goes for dreadnoughts. They're just bigger.

(See, the entire point of a dreadnought is that it's not scared of anything, offensively or defensively. Thus the "dread" "nought". As in doesn't dread anything.)

My vote still remains only for Titan Legions, for all other forms reek of bad anime and hatred by established RPers. Yet Titan Legions are known to be teh own by everyone. :)

SW ships is the relative ship genius. They are flying piles of nothing in the face of the best ships.

Learn some physics. Mass doesn't change no matter how much gravity is acting upon an object. Only the removal or addition of matter can change the mass of an object. Mass is the measure of matter in an object.

I know what the hell mass is. What I don't get is what it has to do, if anything, with space combat.

Just because there is no gravity does not mean Newton's Third goes out the window. If something is pushed, it will pushed back. And I noticed you said "I don't use Newtonian physics". Well, that means either you godmode (likely) or none of you thrusters work, since all thrusters rely on the Third Law to work.

Understand?

I understand your condescending tone and how you are treating me like a five-year-old.

By my use of the phrase, which you summed up, concerning my engines are reactionless gravitic based and don't use Newtonian physics like reaction-based engines.

I know what the hell mass is. What I don't get is what it has to do, if anything, with space combat.
Propulsion. If mass loads are too great for the propulsion system, then the object (in this case, an MS or fighter) will accelerate slowly, and be easily destroyed or outmanuevered by faster ships with lower mass. Therefore, mass is VERY important in space combat.

I understand your condescending tone and how you are treating me like a five-year-old.
WTF are you talking about? I wasn't condescending, I was explaining something.

By my use of the phrase, which you summed up, concerning my engines are reactionless gravitic based and don't use Newtonian physics like reaction-based engines.
Uh-huh. Care to explain how those work?

Something tells me we won't learn how it works.... >.>

Eraclea']Something tells me we won't learn how it works.... >.>
Oh, yeah, didn't see he was offline...

Anyone familar with Tachikoma/Fuchikomas? Would those be mecha?

Eraclea']Anyone familar with Tachikoma/Fuchikomas? Would those be mecha?
If you mean the things from Ghost in the Shell, no, those are considered spider tanks/walkers (like the Imperial AT-ATs, but smaller...)

If you mean the things from Ghost in the Shell, no, those are considered spider tanks/walkers (like the Imperial AT-ATs, but smaller...)

The highest they have is machine guns and a grenade launcher.

http://www.geocities.com/tokyo/towers/1073/fuchikom.jpg

Though I wanted some varient of these for my nation, they are just so cool and effective. :) Cloaking!

Would putting a Hermes unit in be godmodding? Just had to ask...

Eraclea']Would putting a Hermes unit in be godmodding? Just had to ask...
I don't know what the hell that is... could you name the series its from?

Eraclea']Yes... which I think these SW freaks go on about. It doesn't matter if you can wipe every single one of them away with one smart bomb/missile barrage if you have zomg1000000fighters! Well too bad SW fans, it does. A SW fighter is CHEAP, these things are like bicycles I bet!

Agreed. SW fanboys and fangirls make up a large percentage of NS FTers.

All of Star Wars Tech lacks smart weaponry, I dunno why, it just does. In reality they'd be destroyed in a single second.

Agreed.

Just going for efficency. Though Mechs would be able to hold out far longer on from mass because they can turn the heat into electricity also inside them. Direct heat-to-energy. :) On a planet the Mechs would be weaker, but they will still be able to hold up, some of these fighters I see look so fragile they'd burn up if they even tried reentry. A mech is known for surviving reentry btw...just not well.

IMHO, the best place for combat mechs is on a planet's surface. I may use mecha in space, but they are for construction purposes.

Exactly, fighters are small and weak, but numerous. Doing so would make costs too high to spam.

For me, not really. Besides, I was never really into the whole launch-and-forget carboard drone fighter thing. My fighters use the same technology as my capital ships while still being cheap and small enough to produce in large bulk quantities.

Many SW and other techs have versions of mecha, but they opt for driods....too bad they are more likely to spam driods then mecha. If you remember SW Episode II, General Grievous was basically a being in a mech. He absolutely owned the Jedi to. His strength, speed, and power was magnified unbelievably to match his force abilities. Now imagine if every Jedi had the high-tech advantages, insane speed and power and also the protection of a mech? It would be epic fights, but they wouldn't go for it tbh.

Technically, Grievous was a cyborg, like the Borg from Star Trek. True SW-verse mecha are things like the AT-AT, AT-ST, AT-PT, et cetera.

Physical augmentation suits are mecha btw. Mecha aren't just warmachines either. :)

Not that I was aware of. What universe is that info coming from, or is it just your opinion?

Yep. :)

Refering to Einstein on this one, more mass means more energy to make it faster, too bad this is relative and the large engines in mecha are usually much larger and more powerful then a fighters, and they also run ALL the weapons on the Mech, while a fighter can usually only do one thing at a time.

According to my info, smaller objects can build up more speed and create a bigger boom upon impact. Inertia matters more than mass in space.

SW = the kindergarteners choice of FT ships. In RL a Tie Fighter would have its butt destroyed by a cruise missile before it even gets in range to its target.

IMHO, a canon T.I.E., no matter the series, would be pretty much pwned by pretty much every RL MT AA weapon.

Again his stupid Einstienin ideas.

Ya... wonder how SW missed the nano-tech era tbh. Considering we can almost do that now. Small size, big threat. :) Or more crap in less space! :D

And then there's the whole bit about canon SW using fusion power plants (excluding the DS's Hypermatter Core). Hell, after so much IC canon time, you would think they would have come up with something better than simple fusion.

A. There is a recoil, but it won't be too powerful as on Earth, where the recoil turns into sound which can give away your position to EVERYONE and make you an easy target, but Mecha essentially have no recoil to worry about with their building. A fighter has more to worry about then a mech from using lasers. Only thing which would hurt a mech is using an incredibly large gun that is not meant for a mech of whatever type.

Touche. Thus, why some big gun ships need counter thrusters in atmo. However, in space, if you use a propellant based projectile weapon that would create such an use of Newton's third law, then you deserve to be pwned.

B. Large fighters aren't fighters anymore. They are usually even easier targets to.

Like I've said repeatedly, its quality over quantity.

C. Exactly. If I shot you with a bunch of BBs you'd be pissed, if I shot you with a Magnum or a .50 cal you'd be dead. The power and damage of the gun ALWAYS is proportionate to the size and power of the wielder, and let's just face the facts, no Fighter will have the power to punch through a Capital Ship or Battlecruiser on its own. Mecha fall into a Cruiser type basically, and the most powerful are essentially dreadnoughts. They can deal MASSIVE damage with these huge weapons that no fighter can equip. However on the scale, the fleet ships in Gundam are not near Star Destroyer Size, but that's relative. A Gundam-mech would destroy a Star Destroyer in about 30 seconds, they just don't have the mobility to match the power of a nimble mech about 1/200th there size (or less) and SW shields are relative to, based on power to surface area of the blade on a Gundam (350 kw) it doesn't seem like a Star Wars ship was ever anticipating such a piercing blow, and if they were asborbing the heat they could not stop a Gundam from smashing through it. :)

Wrong. There have been canon instances of fighters (namely the Skygrasper atmospheric fighters) that mounted Gundam weapons when the mecha wasn't using them.

Also wrong is your assumption that a fighter wouldn't be able to punch through. Hell, an advanced enough nation would be able to fit a mini-ASL on a fighter if they had the tech, ingenuity, and ability to do it. Not to mention that size doesn't matter.

Also, remember that comparing many things to SW canon tech inevitably results in the SW tech losing.

I don't know what the hell that is... could you name the series its from?

Appleseed. It uses a magnetic field to reduce the weight of the object and in somecases allows them to be capable of flight with aid of thrusters.

Propulsion. If mass loads are too great for the propulsion system, then the object (in this case, an MS or fighter) will accelerate slowly, and be easily destroyed or outmanuevered by faster ships with lower mass. Therefore, mass is VERY important in space combat.

Meh, only if you use a Newtonian STL engine that needs a reaction mass (ie, fuel).

WTF are you talking about? I wasn't condescending, I was explaining something.

Defining what mass was when I didn't ask what it was. Remember that? That was what I was refering to.

Uh-huh. Care to explain how those work?
I don't see why not.

Here's the canon basic principles behind my reactionless gravitic engines, first generation. They have currently become a bit more complex.

One of the key problems for spaceship construction, perhaps the key problem, is that of propulsion. The simple axiom, "Every action requires an equal, but opposite, reaction" has limited spaceship designers to traditional (but highly efficient) variations of rockets. While the efficiency might vary from species to species throughout known space, for the most part and with only a few rare exceptions, rockets in some form are the only means of propulsion available.

However, in the universe of Babylon 5 there are some exceptions to this rule: the Vorlons, the Shadows, the Minbari, Abbai and to a lesser extent the Centauri, have all found a way to bypass the exclusive use of rocket based propulsion. Their ships accelerate and maneuver to a far greater degree than Earthforce ships and the key to this superior performance is their ability to manipulate, on a macro as opposed to quantum level, the special characteristics of the Zero Point Field (ZPF, also known as a Lorentz Field).

ZPF have been explained as being a three dimensional representation of the dimensional objects known as superstrings, believed to be the key building blocks of both matter and energy in our universe. Zero Point Energy is essentially a 'leakage', on the quantum scale, of energy in process of being translated into this reality. Normally, this leakage involves the creation and dissipation of energy such that the result is an almost zero increase of energy. However, it is possible to use the potential of the ZPF as a power source of enormous implications. As Cal Tech physicist Richard Feynman once noted, the energy inherent in the space defined by a single coffee cup- anywhere in the universe- is enough to boil all of the oceans on planet Earth.

There are other implications of the ZPF fields and superstrings, in addition to that of an enormous power source. It has been discovered that inertia - the propensity of an object when at rest to stay at rest, and when in motion to in motion - is a manifestation of that objects electromagnetic interaction with the ZPF. Thus gravity and a lowering of inertia are both capable of being manipulated through the use of controlled electric interaction with the ZPF produced by superstrings.

By manipulating and "bending" these superstrings, advanced ships are able to create distortions in space/time that can be used to push and pull a ship in any given direction. It is via the manipulation of superstrings that allow ships constructed by the Minbari and, to a lesser extent the Centauri, to accelerate and outmaneuver those vessels used by the Drazi, Narn and the Earth Alliance. An important byproduct of this means of propulsion is that the effect of inertia is also negated, allowing ships to accelerate, stop and maneuver at velocities that would crush a person using conventional ion propulsion.

Eraclea']Anyone familar with Tachikoma/Fuchikomas? Would those be mecha?
The "Ghost In The Shell" mecha? Yep, they're mecha as well.

If you mean the things from Ghost in the Shell, no, those are considered spider tanks/walkers (like the Imperial AT-ATs, but smaller...)
Incorrect, they may be called 'tanks' in canon, but they, just like Imperial walkers, are mecha by definition.

Eraclea']The highest they have is machine guns and a grenade launcher.

http://www.geocities.com/tokyo/towers/1073/fuchikom.jpg

Though I wanted some varient of these for my nation, they are just so cool and effective. :) Cloaking!
I don't see why you can't use them. Though, if you go FT, you'll have to do some modifications as the canon ones were PMT.

I saw this post and just had to respond, I hope to god someone beat me tearing this apart and even if someone did I'm going to do it anyway because this idiotic pile of filth cannot be allowed to go unpunished.

WTF does any of that even have to do with space combat? Atmospheric and ground combat, sure, but I don't see the validity in space.

More mass means more momentum and inertia, which means it will be harder to move, which means it will take more energy. Friction will cause energy loss whenever to objects contact eachother. Being space doesn't change any of that.

TBH, even with that, a pilot would still have to move around. Thus, where you going to find room to put something like that on a fighter sized craft?

It's called the cockpit, perhaps you've heard of it?

Mecha hater. Is it just because you aren't able to come up with one that works with your tech that you don't like them?

The basic concept of mecha is flawed, it doesn't matter what kind of tech you have.

More surface area = more area for shield emitters, weapon emplacements, armor, et cetera.

More surface area means less volume, which means less power. Also more surface area means weaker shields since their effect is more spread out.

And when the hell did mass have anything to do with space combat? There is no damn gravity to act upon it to create weight.

This is most godamned stupid thing I've seen in ages. Mass has everything to do with space combat, mass dictates the ships momentum and ineria which means that the more massive a ship is the harder it is to move it.

Untrue. Utilizing my current technology, my space construction mecha are faster and more agile than any old SW fighter.

Your mecha have kiloton range weapons and accelerate at 6000G?

And still, you keep yapping about mass. Explain how mass has any damn thing to do with space combat.

The more mass the more inertia, the more inertia the harder it is for a force to move an object. It relates directly to how well a ship can accelerate and maneuver.

You forget that some nations can fit far more in smaller spaces what lesser nations could. You still forget its quality over quantity.

A.) Its god-damn space. NO RECOIL!

The second most stupid thing you've said in this post. There is recoil in space due to Conservation of Momentum, if you fling a mass at a certain velocity away it will transfer the same force onto you. Newton's third law.

B.) To get a larger volume, a fighter would have to be the size of a freaking star ship.

Or you could make the fighter the size of the mecha and have more volume than the mecha.

C.) Still with the 'bigger is better' philosphy. Its QUALITY that actually matters. Its not the size of the gun that counts, its the amount of damage it can do.

Size matters, a massive starship with any apreciable acceleration has to be made of stronger materials than a smaller one just because it is so massive.

-snip-

Depends on the Mecha and the weapons for if fighters use it. Though a single fighter can down a Star Destroyer shields in a good educated shot. Like those BIG shield generator domes. Size doesn't always matter, but it can.

I dunno about you, but if you are firing a massive cannon in space (solid matter) or even plasma it should have an equal and opposite reaction against the ship. I don't care what BS you say against it, but having a massive continueous stream of energy based weapons is NOT the star wars or any other main tactic in any space battle. Granted the effect is minimal, but the major drain would be on your systems which will overload also.

I don't see why you can't use them. Though, if you go FT, you'll have to do some modifications as the canon ones were PMT.

Alright, I can put a small fusion or hydrogen reactor in and swap out the grenade launcher for smart missiles I can get a cool little weapon. :D

Meh, only if you use a Newtonian STL engine that needs a reaction mass (ie, fuel).
The mass of an object has an effect on how force makes the object move, and gravity is force. It simply pulls, whereas propulsion pushes.


Defining what mass was when I didn't ask what it was. Remember that? That was what I was refering to.
You said that mass doesn't have any effect in zero-gravity locations. I explained that it does, and why it does.


I don't see why not.

Here's the canon basic principles behind my reactionless gravitic engines, first generation. They have currently become a bit more complex.
snip, snip, and snip
Uh-huh. Babylon 5, gotcha.

Your mecha have kiloton range weapons and accelerate at 6000G?

Rofl. I stopped reading there.

It'd be nice if you could not insult others like that. Mecha are clearly not flawed in their originated places.

The real problem with giant mechs of death and wankness is that most times people forget about how expensive they really would be.

For the cost of research/development/ and actuall construction I can build a formatable size of tanks.

I dont feel that Mecha is a good idea really, because when you invest that much money in something, and after you get a sizable force. You could upgrade you ground military.

If i were you i would stick to power armor, and small battle suits. But this is just me and if you really want to do it go for it. but just be aware that allot of Ft nations will see it a wanking if you dont rp them properly.

ooc: sry about the spelling... my computer is fubar right now

Eraclea']Rofl. I stopped reading there.

It'd be nice if you could not insult others like that. Mecha are clearly not flawed in their originated places.

I haven't insutled anyone till right now asswipe.

The mecha concept is flawed on the fundamental level. I'll list them in point form so you can follow along easier.

1) The only usable volume is in the chest, most of which is cockpit if you go by Gundam. The mechanisms to move the redicolous arms and legs use up all of the volume in said arms and legs. That leaves very little volume for the important stuff like fuel, life support and reactors.

2) The arms and legs, they add complexity increasing cost and maintenence time while adding to the target cross-section while adding the disadvantage of higher ground pressure when on a planet.

3) The mecha design means lots of flat plates of armor, which is easier to penetrate than sloped armor.


You want to talk about SW PM me or start a thread in General. I'll tear apart your arguments there so as to not clutter up this thread.

I really want to use most power suits, but maybe a few large ones. Something better then an exosuit at least.

Bah double post, did NS just crash for everyone?

Good lord, I leave to eat for a couple hours, and look what I come back to... Congrats, I think my brain has exploded from some of these comments. I'll address my favorite beacons of stupidity.


Physical augmentation suits are mecha btw. Mecha aren't just warmachines either.
No. Just no. Power armor is just that: Power armor. It is in no way mecha. It merely makes soldiers better. Mecha are gargantuan vehicles with a horridly inefficient means of locomotion. Power armor is a suit of armor that *gasps* makes the wearer more powerful.

Your arguement that a same size fighter would have more power and be overall better then a mech. The problem is that 50 or 60 men that could replace a tank would indeed be more powerful, but it doesn't mean that they will be capable of beating it.

Erm. No. A tank is vastly more powerful, due largely to its higher speed, larger weaponry, heavy armor, efficient means of locomotion, and cost effectiveness. To think otherwise is silliness.


Fighters are strong, but have little armor and although nimble, they have very little weaponry, mostly powerful lasers and maybe a few torpedos or other missiles. Mecha are designed to unleash absolute hell in comparison. Fighters are essentially distractions, while a Mech is the equivolent of a tank in WWII. Its very presence is a threat. Its big, its bulky and it will blow your head right off if you are in its way.
Wow. Just wow. I have a question: What do you not get about the phrase "of equivalent size?" This means that the fighter is of equivalent size to your mecha, meaning it can mount the same weapons. Now, if we assume equivalent technology (we have to to compare the things, after all), I have more space to mount them in. Simple geometry here. More weapons means I can shoot more things at you.


A. There is a recoil, but it won't be too powerful as on Earth, where the recoil turns into sound which can give away your position to EVERYONE and make you an easy target, but Mecha essentially have no recoil to worry about with their building. A fighter has more to worry about then a mech from using lasers. Only thing which would hurt a mech is using an incredibly large gun that is not meant for a mech of whatever type.
My god, the pain... My brains are bleeding now, you know that? Right, I'm going to have to beat this into your head now: RECOIL DOES NOT MAKE SOUND. LARGE EXPLOSIONS DO. RECOIL MAKES MR. RIFLE KICK YOUR SHOULDER. MR. RIFLE KICKING YOUR SHOULDER HURTS, AND CAN MAKE YOU CRY. Even more importantly, Mr. Rifle causes you to move backwards. An example of the side effects of recoil can be found in Stalin's Orchestra, a massive "super-tank" that knocked itself over when all its guns fired at once, rendering it useless. In space, recoil gets WORSE, as there's no air resistance (or gravity) to stop you, meaning you will KEEP moving backwards at high speeds unless you waste energy to stop yourself.

Now, let me address some of the various idiotic comments that came up at once: Firstly, let's define reaction mass. Reaction mass is what you use to make your engines work. Gasoline, hydrogen, antimatter, whatever. Nearly everything needs it. The more you store, the longer you can go, or the faster you can go if you burn a lot of it at once. Due to their piss-poor volume, mecha can store less of it than a fighter.

With ZPMs, you no longer need reaction mass. Bully for you. All this means is that I can pack more ZPMs into the same space. Now my fighter generates more power than your mecha by a extremely large margin (remember, we're judging it with equivalent technology, as there is literally no tech that you can apply to a mech and not a fighter). This means that I can put more energy into weapons, meaning that I hurt you more, more energy into my thrusters (or, as the case may be, grav drive), meaning I can go faster, and more energy into my shields, which means I can take one hell of a bigger beating than you.

This is, of course, assuming your engines use energy, your weapons use energy, and your shields use energy. Of course, you could have a perpetual motion machine that doesn't require any input of power, or your ships could run off of tiny faeries that shit nickels. Who knows.


Just going for efficency. Though Mechs would be able to hold out far longer on from mass because they can turn the heat into electricity also inside them. Direct heat-to-energy. On a planet the Mechs would be weaker, but they will still be able to hold up, some of these fighters I see look so fragile they'd burn up if they even tried reentry. A mech is known for surviving reentry btw...just not well.
Yep, it's confirmed. Brains are bleeding. Blood is leaking out of my ears. WHY, GANTZ?!?

Right, obviously you're not looking at the right fighters. Let's try the dragonfly (http://wiki.esusalliance.co.uk/images/thumb/8/8a/DragonflyIV.jpg/800px-DragonflyIV.jpg). Does THAT look fragile or lightly armed? Also, have you considered that this handy-dandy heat-to-power gadget could be used on *gasp* fighters?

Right, must look at another topic before Freddy Krueger pops through the screen and PROVES that this is all just a horrible dream.

Excellent post Otagia. Also some more general stuff from me, the way mecha are stupid all the time, fighters are stupid in space.

They're essentially just the first stage of a multi-stage missile in space, since fighters don't offer any over-the-horizon ability in space. What's the point of putting a person in the first-stage of a missile when a silicon chip will do?

Also with any given tech you can put a bigger and better version of it on a capship, which means fighters totally lack anyway of harming a capship, this goes for mecha too in case you were wondering.

Fighters only exist because they're more entertaining than missiles.

Fighters only exist because they're more entertaining than missiles.



lol. that needs to be sigged.

lol. that needs to be sigged.

Always an honour to be sigged.:)

Also with any given tech you but a bigger and better version of it on a capship, which means fighters totally lack anyway of harming a capship, this goes for mecha to in case you were wondering.
I agree with this for the most part, but of course, VERY large volumes of fighters can still put the hurt on capships (two hundred thousand single megaton blasts firing simultaneously is still two hundred gigatons hitting at once). Then there's the opposite end of the spectrum (namely, the Facehuggerian fighter I showed), which is a fighter so expensive most nations would consider it a small capital.

I agree with this for the most part, but of course, VERY large volumes of fighters can still put the hurt on capships (two hundred thousand single megaton blasts firing simultaneously is still two hundred gigatons hitting at once). Then there's the opposite end of the spectrum (namely, the Facehuggerian fighter I showed), which is a fighter so expensive most nations would consider it a small capital.

All very true, especially on NS since it is so fluid. Although even mass swarms of fighters fail against capital ships when you have close to six orders of magnitude or more difference between them in terms of power generation, such as is with my tech or Star Wars (again you want details PM me).

And that Facehuggerian fighter would die against a Facehuggerian capital ship. My comparison was assuming equal tech levels. Afterall even a mecha could take out a WWI tank, most of the time anyway.:p

Umm wows..

The term "mecha" is derived from the Japanese abbreviation for the English word "mechanical." In Japanese, "mecha" encompasses all mechanical objects, including cars, guns, computers, and other devices. English speakers have repurposed the term to mean only the vehicles described above.

In most science fiction stories in which they appear, mecha are war machines: essentially armored fighting vehicles with legs instead of treads or wheels. Some stories, such as the Japanese manga Patlabor, also encompass mecha used for civilian purposes such as heavy construction work, police functions, or firefighting. Military mechas can again be divided into Western and Eastern versions, with Western mechas fighting mostly with missiles, machine guns, rockets and other projectile weapons and lasers (although exceptions with melee weaponry exist) and are robust, slightly even tank-looking war machines. Eastern mechas are usually graceful, human-shaped and less angled than their Western counterparts, and fly more often. They also differ by their weaponry, relying more on swords than guns. Sometimes telling an Eastern mecha from a Western can be difficult, though.

If you recall my use of powered suited with those weapons like a cannon and powerful sniper rifle were what I was pointing at. It was in reference to an earlier post.

Erm. No. A tank is vastly more powerful, due largely to its higher speed, larger weaponry, heavy armor, efficient means of locomotion, and cost effectiveness. To think otherwise is silliness.

60 men are more powerful combined then a single tank. You are confusing power for use. 1 man can destroy a tank with a rocket launcher. 60 men against one tank will surely win. Even if you chuck an Abhrams at them.
Number to power ratio favors cheaper but heavily armed forces.

Wow. Just wow. I have a question: What do you not get about the phrase "of equivalent size?" This means that the fighter is of equivalent size to your mecha, meaning it can mount the same weapons. Now, if we assume equivalent technology (we have to to compare the things, after all), I have more space to mount them in. Simple geometry here. More weapons means I can shoot more things at you.

If you have a fighter that is 6-9ft I'd slap you. More so if said fighter is going to be flying, shooting and other methods to fight when a my bulky mech can just fire a smart missile at you and destroy it in a second. A 6-9ft (tall, with regard to a 3-4 ft maximum width) fighter is just laughable. You got confused, admit it.

My god, the pain... My brains are bleeding now, you know that? Right, I'm going to have to beat this into your head now: RECOIL DOES NOT MAKE SOUND. LARGE EXPLOSIONS DO. RECOIL MAKES MR. RIFLE KICK YOUR SHOULDER. MR. RIFLE KICKING YOUR SHOULDER HURTS, AND CAN MAKE YOU CRY. Even more importantly, Mr. Rifle causes you to move backwards. An example of the side effects of recoil can be found in Stalin's Orchestra, a massive "super-tank" that knocked itself over when all its guns fired at once, rendering it useless. In space, recoil gets WORSE, as there's no air resistance (or gravity) to stop you, meaning you will KEEP moving backwards at high speeds unless you waste energy to stop yourself.

Now, let me address some of the various idiotic comments that came up at once: Firstly, let's define reaction mass. Reaction mass is what you use to make your engines work. Gasoline, hydrogen, antimatter, whatever. Nearly everything needs it. The more you store, the longer you can go, or the faster you can go if you burn a lot of it at once. Due to their piss-poor volume, mecha can store less of it than a fighter.

With ZPMs, you no longer need reaction mass. Bully for you. All this means is that I can pack more ZPMs into the same space. Now my fighter generates more power than your mecha by a extremely large margin (remember, we're judging it with equivalent technology, as there is literally no tech that you can apply to a mech and not a fighter). This means that I can put more energy into weapons, meaning that I hurt you more, more energy into my thrusters (or, as the case may be, grav drive), meaning I can go faster, and more energy into my shields, which means I can take one hell of a bigger beating than you.

This is, of course, assuming your engines use energy, your weapons use energy, and your shields use energy. Of course, you could have a perpetual motion machine that doesn't require any input of power, or your ships could run off of tiny faeries that shit nickels. Who knows.

*gasp*

Lasers are mostly recoiless. Also Metal Storm weaponry fires so fast recoil can't effect it during a burst. I mixed up firing for the recoil, two seperate things, but I can assure you, firing a laser will not blow my mech to shreds or shoot it off into space provided you thrust properly to compensate. Essentially the same principal that a fighter does when firing a laser.

For the size of my mech, your fighter wouldn't be possible. As it cannot carry its weapons anywhere else but inside it or have it built in or attached. Whereas my mech can both have built in ones and uses a seemingly infinite amount of different weapons, ranging from close combat, to long range, to just plain defensive in nature.

Your fighter is fixed with whatever set up it has when it leaves the hangar, my mech can switch and swap with other mechs as simple as handing a gun to another person. Granted this means it can blow you away with a large amount of weapons, in which it has some of its own built in for emergencies or whatever combat, something a fighter is NOT capable of.

Yep, it's confirmed. Brains are bleeding. Blood is leaking out of my ears. WHY, GANTZ?!?

Right, obviously you're not looking at the right fighters. Let's try the dragonfly. Does THAT look fragile or lightly armed? Also, have you considered that this handy-dandy heat-to-power gadget could be used on *gasp* fighters?

Right, must look at another topic before Freddy Krueger pops through the screen and PROVES that this is all just a horrible dream.

Why would you put a heat to energy system on a fighter? Its expensive and you don't have much internal heat built up or a large amount of heat to deal with internally. It doesn't make much sense, but to each his own, the system would help channel and draw some power from the large amount of heat that will be produced. (Meant for close combat and stressful movements to not cause it to shut down from overheating)

Look at Tie fighters, even you fighter will NOT survive re-entry, the heat will overwhelm the system and it will fry. Even yours does not appear that it could survive atmospheric re-entry on a good condition. My mech would need a shell for that also, but the thing is it could take it and survive like the original Gundams and continue fighting.

Heh. Yes, well, ANYTHING dies to a Facehuggerian capital ship, especially the Trinity classes. Bleeding multi-quadrillion facehugger dreadnoughts...

I agree with this for the most part, but of course, VERY large volumes of fighters can still put the hurt on capships (two hundred thousand single megaton blasts firing simultaneously is still two hundred gigatons hitting at once). Then there's the opposite end of the spectrum (namely, the Facehuggerian fighter I showed), which is a fighter so expensive most nations would consider it a small capital.

All depends on the tech, but most SW are probably $70,000-$120,000 in cost for them basically. This is in a place where Anakin could build a podracer as a slave and race it for money and it being one of the best. The fact everyone has ships and everyone is capable of some amazing power makes those SW fighters look like drones more then capable fighters.

What's the point of putting a person in the first-stage of a missile when a silicon chip will do?...Fighters only exist because they're more entertaining than missiles.Well, not quite.

I've pondered that same question, as I have both fighters and missiles in my canon, and both are used in similar ways.

At the point where Turing-class AI becomes a reality, you are correct: fighters lose alll value. You're better off shoving an AI inside a drone and saving the life-support mass.

But if you still use older "guided" ordnance (including "smart" ordnance that is still not yet smart enough to achieve Turing levels of intelligence), then a fighter has something missiles don't: a sentient brain.

Now, when you're fighting a high relativistic speeds or battling across a large expanse of space (several light seconds), stand-off weapons have a problem: there's just too long a control delay at range (20-30 seconds) to permit accurate use. That means that you either have to use homing weapons (which can be spoofed) or you have to get a sentient controller close to the line of fire and have that controller guide the missiles in the rest of the way.

In my canon, then, fighters are the pickets and FO's of the fleet. They're more expendable than capital ships and smarter than missiles. The bigger ships sit back in the rear and hurl missiles at the enemy; the fighters take control of those missiles and point them at their targets (or simply feed targetting data to the missiles).

One more thing: missiles requiring an external controller force that controller to reveal its position whenever it transmits instructions to the missiles in question. This can be bad for the controller. In contrast, a group of fighters can attack without any signals being sent at all, as each has a "mind" of its own. This requires training and discipline, but not much more than most professional football* teams exhibit.

But with respect to mechas I agree: the entire concept is idiotic. Watching them "dodge" energy bolts is hysterically funny (that opening video comes to mind); trying to figure out how they kill angular momentum when they spin is even funnier (and don't compare flying through a vacuum to skydiving; there's no air in space for a faux skydiver to use in killing its spin). And energy swords to slash battleships to pieces? All I can say is, "Oh, my!" Hand to hand combat in space is a concept that I can only think about if I'm willing to risk rupture from laughing my guts out.

Fighters and mechas are basically just ships. The only difference between them then, is that fighters are small ships and mechas are stupid-looking, inefficient ships.

*American or otherwise.

Heh. Yes, well, ANYTHING dies to a Facehuggerian capital ship, especially the Trinity classes. Bleeding multi-quadrillion facehugger dreadnoughts...

Isn't that a dead-and-gone nation?

Eraclea']If you have a fighter that is 6-9ft I'd slap you.

You do realize that modern fighters are already the size of Gundams right? A F-22 is 62'1" long, 44'6" in wingspan and 16'8" tall and masses 18 metric tons empty. A Gundam is on average 60 feet tall, about 20 feet wide and 10 feet deep and masses 40 metric tons. Of that volume only half the chest is really usable for systems.

So a modern day fighter has more internal volume and masses less than a Gundam. Put advanced technology into the F-22 airframe and it would out accelerate and outpower the Gundam.

More so if said fighter is going to be flying, shooting and other methods to fight when a my bulky mech can just fire a smart missile at you and destroy it in a second.

Not when the fighter is going to detect the mecha at a longer range due to its more powerfull sensors thanks to its large reactor and shoot the missile at you first.

A 6-9ft (tall, with regard to a 3-4 ft maximum width) fighter is just laughable. You got confused, admit it.

You have no idea how big modern fighters are.




For the size of my mech, your fighter wouldn't be possible.

WROOOOOOONG!

As it cannot carry its weapons anywhere else but inside it or have it built in or attached. Whereas my mech can both have built in ones and uses a seemingly infinite amount of different weapons, ranging from close combat, to long range, to just plain defensive in nature.

The fighter can go back to base to re-arm and since it doesn't use asining giant rifles it can actually cary more powerfull weaponry due to its larger internal volume.

Your fighter is fixed with whatever set up it has when it leaves the hangar, my mech can switch and swap with other mechs as simple as handing a gun to another person.

Which leaves the mecha handing over its weapon defenseless.

Granted this means it can blow you away with a large amount of weapons,

You ever seen those pictures that show all the weapons a fighter can carry?

in which it has some of its own built in for emergencies or whatever combat, something a fighter is NOT capable of.

Because no fighter has a built in cannon or anything... oh wait.:rolleyes:



Why would you put a heat to energy system on a fighter?

So you can recover some of the waste heat. Same reason you'd put it on a mecha.


Look at Tie fighters, even you fighter will NOT survive re-entry,

The Empire Strikes Back proves you wrong, what with TIE fighters chasing the Falcon in Bespin's atmosphere and all.

Eraclea']Lasers are mostly recoiless. Also Metal Storm weaponry fires so fast recoil can't effect it during a burst. I mixed up firing for the recoil, two seperate things, but I can assure you, firing a laser will not blow my mech to shreds or shoot it off into space provided you thrust properly to compensate. Essentially the same principal that a fighter does when firing a laser.

The hell Metalstorms don't! They've got INSANE recoil from all that ordinance cooking off in under 10 secs. The one time I've seen them used in a realistic manner, the author mandated that the tanks(much better wheelbase than any mech) deploy firing jacks so they didn't flip. Of course, that was an Abrams chasis, but even then. No mech will ever be able to effectively use a Metalstorm system.

-snip well thought out and written post-

Even thougn non-Turing level missiles can be spoofed they are still better than fighters. They have longer range since they don't have to come back home, they can carry larger warheads/more fuel/whatever because they don't need life support for the pilot and they're cheaper than a fighter.

If you have a high ECM environment, you just launch more missiles.

Well, not quite.

I've pondered that same question, as I have both fighters and missiles in my canon, and both are used in similar ways.

At the point where Turing-class AI becomes a reality, you are correct: fighters lose alll value. You're better off shoving an AI inside a drone and saving the life-support mass.

But if you still use older "guided" ordnance (including "smart" ordnance that is still not yet smart enough to achieve Turing levels of intelligence), then a fighter has something missiles don't: a sentient brain.

Now, when you're fighting a high relativistic speeds or battling across a large expanse of space (several light seconds), stand-off weapons have a problem: there's just too long a control delay at range (20-30 seconds) to permit accurate use. That means that you either have to use homing weapons (which can be spoofed) or you have to get a sentient controller close to the line of fire and have that controller guide the missiles in the rest of the way.

In my canon, then, fighters are the pickets and FO's of the fleet. They're more expendable than capital ships and smarter than missiles. The bigger ships sit back in the rear and hurl missiles at the enemy; the fighters take control of those missiles and point them at their targets (or simply feed targetting data to the missiles).

One more thing: missiles requiring an external controller force that controller to reveal its position whenever it transmits instructions to the missiles in question. This can be bad for the controller. In contrast, a group of fighters can attack without any signals being sent at all, as each has a "mind" of its own. This requires training and discipline, but not much more than most professional football* teams exhibit.

But with respect to mechas I agree: the entire concept is idiotic. Watching them "dodge" energy bolts is hysterically funny (that opening video comes to mind); trying to figure out how they kill angular momentum when they spin is even funnier (and don't compare flying through a vacuum to skydiving; there's no air in space for a faux skydiver to use in killing its spin). And energy swords to slash battleships to pieces? All I can say is, "Oh, my!" Hand to hand combat in space is a concept that I can only think about if I'm willing to risk rupture from laughing my guts out.

Fighters and mechas are basically just ships. The only difference between them then, is that fighters are small ships and mechas are stupid-looking, inefficient ships.

*American or otherwise.


Everything is relative. Mechs, even Gundam ones have a reason to be using that stuff. Those battleships you see have no shields, and the concept of smart weaponry would be good if all electrical systems weren't rendered without communication from the M-partical. Besides, it would pass through shields. Everyone always forgets this, shields are relative. They can be ignored, dropped or overwhelmed.

Even thougn non-Turing level missiles can be spoofed they are still better than fighters. They have longer range since they don't have to come back home, they can carry larger warheads/more fuel/whatever because they don't need life support for the pilot and they're cheaper than a fighter.

If you have a high ECM environment, you just launch more missiles.

If you have range issues with fighters on a battlefield you shouldn't be using them. Though all other points are good.

Isn't that a dead-and-gone nation?
Nope, still around, and currently badly mauling New Dornalian forces.


If you have a fighter that is 6-9ft I'd slap you. More so if said fighter is going to be flying, shooting and other methods to fight when a my bulky mech can just fire a smart missile at you and destroy it in a second. A 6-9ft (tall, with regard to a 3-4 ft maximum width) fighter is just laughable. You got confused, admit it.

Six to nine feet is not a mecha. Hell, that's barely a tall person. Best case, it's power armor. Worst case, it's a guy in an EVA suit. Also, you seem to be forgetting the wonderful world of point defense. That smart missile will most likely be shot down by a graser, followed by a shot to the firer that fries him nicely.

Anyway, what's so implausible about a 6 foot fighter? Hell, I could probably pull the warhead out of a SCCAM and replace it with a graser or two and voila, a fighter.


60 men are more powerful combined then a single tank. You are confusing power for use. 1 man can destroy a tank with a rocket launcher. 60 men against one tank will surely win. Even if you chuck an Abhrams at them.
Number to power ratio favors cheaper but heavily armed forces.

Modern tanks? The ones with actual CIWS and reactive armor? Trust me, the tank wins, especially with its large amount of high calibre, high ROF weaponry, grenade launchers, and 125mm shotgun.


For the size of my mech, your fighter wouldn't be possible. As it cannot carry its weapons anywhere else but inside it or have it built in or attached. Whereas my mech can both have built in ones and uses a seemingly infinite amount of different weapons, ranging from close combat, to long range, to just plain defensive in nature.
Lovely. And why exactly do you really need to switch out weaponry in the field? You shouldn't NEED different weaponry, the standard chassis should have everything it needs to fight at maximum effectiveness. And a pair of lasers at several times the strength of all the wonderful weapons you're holding still trumps it.


Lasers are mostly recoiless. Also Metal Storm weaponry fires so fast recoil can't effect it during a burst. I mixed up firing for the recoil, two seperate things, but I can assure you, firing a laser will not blow my mech to shreds or shoot it off into space provided you thrust properly to compensate. Essentially the same principal that a fighter does when firing a laser.
On Metalstorm: Yes, when firing. The problem is them tearing off a leg or arm a microsecond later from the sheer force. As for lasers, I STILL have a much larger power supply to feed them with, meaning mine are bigger and nastier. Fighter still wins.

Even thougn non-Turing level missiles can be spoofed they are still better than fighters. They have longer range since they don't have to come back home, they can carry larger warheads/more fuel/whatever because they don't need life support for the pilot and they're cheaper than a fighter.

If you have a high ECM environment, you just launch more missiles.Oh, trust me: missiles are my primary weapon (as HT is learning in our UII first encounter (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=492568)); fighters get used in my space forces for station/planetary/system defense and as fleet auxiliaries. We haven't gotten to a major action yet, but when we do, HT will see that I use roughly equal numbers of fighters and capital ships, with fighters as pickets. Maybe it would be better to think of them as "pocket frigates" or such...

The use of mecha is really a personal choice. Some nations despise them (Xess, for example), and some love them (Thracia). It doesn’t really matter. In the time frames we’re talking about here, technology could be developed that would make them viable. However, any use for them in MT or PMT (besides limited urban stuff) is daft.

Eraclea']If you have range issues with fighters on a battlefield you shouldn't be using them. Though all other points are good.

You don't get it do you. A fighter has less range than a missile because the fighter has to save half its fuel so it can go home, a missile does not so it will have longer range than the fighter.

The use of mecha is really a personal choice. Some nations despise them (Xess, for example), and some love them (Thracia). It doesn’t really matter. In the time frames we’re talking about here, technology could be developed that would make them viable. However, any use for them in MT or PMT (besides limited urban stuff) is daft.A sound and sober assessment. My problem with mechas is when people assume that I agree with their inflated view of what these things can do and proceed to tell me their dozen gundam warriors are slicing my fleet to ribbons with their energy blades, at which point I'm going to laugh in their faces.

I have no problem with someone treating their mechas as ships, aircraft, or armored fighting vehicles of equal tonnage and/or size to mine, with roughly equivalent capabilities. In that case, I'll be happy to indulge them.

Nope, still around, and currently badly mauling New Dornalian forces.


Six to nine feet is not a mecha. Hell, that's barely a tall person. Best case, it's power armor. Worst case, it's a guy in an EVA suit. Also, you seem to be forgetting the wonderful world of point defense. That smart missile will most likely be shot down by a graser, followed by a shot to the firer that fries him nicely.

Ouch.

Though these are mechs in every since on the word. And yes they have tracking, and other methods of distinguishing them are also true.

The distinction between smaller mecha and their smaller cousins (and likely progenitors), the powered armor suits, is blurred; according to one definition, a mecha is piloted while a powered armor is worn. Anything large enough to have a cockpit where the pilot is seated is generally considered a mecha.

They are strong and pretty agile for my people.

Anyway, what's so implausible about a 6 foot fighter? Hell, I could probably pull the warhead out of a SCCAM and replace it with a graser or two and voila, a fighter.

That's just weak.

Modern tanks? The ones with actual CIWS and reactive armor? Trust me, the tank wins, especially with its large amount of high calibre, high ROF weaponry, grenade launchers, and 125mm shotgun.
Well picking the USA and Britains top ones are like that, most nations aren't that advanced, but still they will be destroyed with proper weapons.

No RPG-7 crap. TOW and Anti-tank weaponry that is modern and not hand-me-down terrorist weaponry, that is about 30 years old.


Lovely. And why exactly do you really need to switch out weaponry in the field? You shouldn't NEED different weaponry, the standard chassis should have everything it needs to fight at maximum effectiveness. And a pair of lasers at several times the strength of all the wonderful weapons you're holding still trumps it.

The fact I can and switch easily is a great asset. This also allows for another person to grab the weapon if a comrade should fall or use many weapons very quickly (projectiles) without reloading them.

I like that ability. :D

On Metalstorm: Yes, when firing. The problem is them tearing off a leg or arm a microsecond later from the sheer force. As for lasers, I STILL have a much larger power supply to feed them with, meaning mine are bigger and nastier. Fighter still wins.

Well Point-defense wouldn't work with the M-particle around, blocks the sensors. Same for most lasers that are not shot by hand. Which is why those are popular...

Though metal storm wouldn't rip off an arm or leg...you need to look at those that a little better. Don't make assumptions on that when it really exists.

Eraclea']Well Point-defense wouldn't work with the M-particle around, blocks the sensors. Same for most lasers that are not shot by hand. Which is why those are popular..."M-particle"? Sorry - no such thing.

You don't get it do you. A fighter has less range than a missile because the fighter has to save half its fuel so it can go home, a missile does not so it will have longer range than the fighter.

The time to intercept must be huge then.....making it easy. Jeeze. That's why you fight close to the enemy.

Eraclea']The time to intercept must be huge then.....making it easy. Jeeze. That's why you fight close to the enemy.Assuming the enemy lets you close...

My problem with mechas is when people assume that I agree with their inflated view of what these things can do and proceed to tell me their dozen gundam warriors are slicing my fleet to ribbons with their energy blades, at which point I'm going to laugh in their faces.

Haha, yea, now that's ridiculous. A mecha would have to be gigantic to do anything to a starship, even in numbers. Anything smaller than a frigate (probably) has nothing to fear at all. But then again, the same goes for fighters.

"M-particle"? Sorry - no such thing.

Uh yes. That's why Gundams exist as warmachines.

Assuming the enemy lets you close...

Can just shoot them all down then... same as them jeeze.

Eraclea']Uh yes. That's why Gundams exist as warmachines.

M-Particles are not real. Besides they don't block visible spectrum light, it'd be easy to but a video camera on the missile and give it patern recognition software. Which in the future would be far better than anything we have today.

Eraclea']Can just shoot them all down then... same as them jeeze.

Enter missile spamming, you launch ten-shousand+ missiles and overwhelm point-defence. Or just use LOS weapons like lasers. A point-defence laser will destroy a mecha just as well as a missile.

Eraclea']Uh yes. That's why Gundams exist as warmachines.


They only exist IC because apparently every single person in the Gundam universes have been stricken with mass stupidity, that is unfortunately, not terminal.

Honestly, have you ever watched Gundam Wing, for example? Everyone in it has the tactical genius of an elementary schooler. They're fucking pathetic, and their equipment sucks shit as well.

Any mech seen in FT space combat against a proper FT warship should do the only thing possible: Run the fuck away, fast.

For example, fielding Gundam type mechs against a typical RR dreadnought would simply end with a lot of dead mechs, given that considering most designs have no such thing as an inertial compensator, they could honestly be outran by a multi-megaton warship, which could simply spam them to death with missiles from way beyond their own ranges.

Haha, yea, now that's ridiculous. A mecha would have to be gigantic to do anything to a starship, even in numbers. Anything smaller than a frigate (probably) has nothing to fear at all. But then again, the same goes for fighters.


Uh ya sure... you have no idea what you are even talking about.

It is also speculated that, rather than replacing tanks, a mech could be used for urban combat scenarios in an infantry support role. Such a mecha would probably only be 5-7 meters tall and would be verging on power armor. The size of such a mecha would enable it to carry heavy weapons such as a chaingun that would otherwise be unavailable to an infantry squad, yet its legs would allow it to maneuver more freely than a tank in the close confines of an urban environment. Furthermore the presence of actuated arms would allow a mecha to deal with infantry that manage to get into direct physical contact with the mech, something that tanks are currently unable to do. In addition it would grant several enhanced prehensile attributes unavailable to vehicles and improved over infantry capabilities. The paved roads of an urban environment would also negate the problems of weight distribution. Despite this, a mecha in an urban environment faces the difficulty of maneuvering; the sheer amount of clutter that can be present in urban terrain might prove too much for a mech's gyroscopes to handle.

Another consideration for military use of mecha would be for non-combat support functions. The example in the movie Aliens is one such depiction, where the vaguely humanoid shape allows for an unmatched versatility in manual labour tasks. Under these circumstances, where development of such a mecha was undertaken for other reasons, it might be worthwhile for a military service to arm them after the fact. Indeed this is already seen in existing militaries as evidenced by the IDF Caterpillar D9. All of the above issues would be mitigated by the fact that combat would not be the mecha's primary role, but would instead be a secondary function only used when circumstances are dire. This would naturally point us towards the development of mecha for purposes other than military (heavy police action, industrial firefighting, mining, etc.). If this were to take place, no doubt some military service would apply the concept of mechas to a fighting force, were some other sector to take the cost of development upon themselves.

Using them to carry weapons to down a fighter or any starship (vague comment but whatever) is a moot point about them being able to damage them. The weapon does the damage, not the mech. When the mech is the one carrying it. Your assumption is childish.

Eraclea']Uh ya sure... you have no idea what you are even talking about. Using them to carry weapons to down a fighter or any starship (vague comment but whatever) is a moot point about them being able to damage them. The weapon does the damage, not the mech. When the mech is the one carrying it. Your assumption is childish.

No, actually, I do. I am an avid fan of Gundam Wing (which is why I take offense at Vernii's foul-mouthed slander) and am perfectly versed in their abilities. But the simple fact is that starship armor and shields are designed to work against other starships. Starships with guns bigger than a dozen Gundams. It would be like assaulting a Yamato-class Battleship (that has shields!) with a toothpick.

Eraclea']Uh yes. That's why Gundams exist as warmachines.

Ah yes, the elusive nonexistant particle. Is it an element? If not, from what is it formed? Why is there no real-life evidence of its existence? Show me the articles and nobel prizes that are associated with it.

M-Particles are not real. Besides they don't block visible spectrum light, it'd be easy to but a video camera on the missile and give it patern recognition software. Which in the future would be far better than anything we have today.

It won't be able to lock on and unless you put on bulky and heavy shielding the electronics would be fried. So bye-bye guided missiles, and point defense weaponry, as that the sensors would be fogged and infra-red is inaccurate and unable to get a good lock. It just plain wouldn't be effective.

Ah yes, the elusive nonexistant particle. Is it an element? If not, from what is it formed? Why is there no real-life evidence of its existence? Show me the articles and nobel prizes that are associated with it.

It doesn't have to exist now. Just because nobody knew about atoms in 2,000 B.C.E. doesn't mean they don't exist.

No, actually, I do. I am an avid fan of Gundam Wing (which is why I take offense at Vernii's foul-mouthed slander) and am perfectly versed in their abilities. But the simple fact is that starship armor and shields are designed to work against other starships. Starships with guns bigger than a dozen Gundams. It would be like assaulting a Yamato-class Battleship (that has shields!) with a toothpick.

Well you put shields into this they become ineffective yes, unless you use a weapon to pierce the shields. Though since mine can carry a multitude of weapons and are very small (fighter sized) they could do the damage, but the threat to them would be too large and it would not be worth the cost.

I'd really love to have gundams pierce the shields on some ships, but how many NS nations don't have shields for their ships?

Eraclea']It won't be able to lock on and unless you put on bulky and heavy shielding the electronics would be fried. So bye-bye guided missiles, and point defense weaponry, as that the sensors would be fogged and infra-red is inaccurate and unable to get a good lock. It just plain wouldn't be effective.


Minovsky particles aren't some sort of magic "YOU CAN'T SEE THIS!" device. As is shown in the series themselves, there's nothing preventing optical tracking, or else the mechs themselves would be blinded, not to mention all the times in the series when targetting locks are indeed established.

Eraclea']Well you put shields into this they become ineffective yes, unless you use a weapon to pierce the shields. Though since mine can carry a multitude of weapons and are very small (fighter sized) they could do the damage, but the threat to them would be too large and it would not be worth the cost.

I'd really love to have gundams pierce the shields on some ships, but how many NS nations don't have shields for their ships?

Even without shields, some of these ships can fly through suns and come out fine. The armor is in excess of 20 feet thick and tempered to withstand teratons of force. A simple beam saber or dober gun won't do anything.

Eraclea']Well you put shields into this they become ineffective yes, unless you use a weapon to pierce the shields. Though since mine can carry a multitude of weapons and are very small (fighter sized) they could do the damage, but the threat to them would be too large and it would not be worth the cost.

I'd really love to have gundams pierce the shields on some ships, but how many NS nations don't have shields for their ships?

Well, neither of my main nations have shields. Technically I guess MMs Impeller wedges would be shields, but I think of them as an engine.

Ah yes, the elusive nonexistant particle. Is it an element? If not, from what is it formed? Why is there no real-life evidence of its existence? Show me the articles and nobel prizes that are associated with it.


Named after its inventor, Dr. Y.T. Minovsky, this reactor was "radical" due to the fact that it was the first "clean" fusion reactor, emitting zero neutron radiation. The nuclear equation was:

{}^3_2\mathrm{He} + {}^2_1\mathrm H \to {}^4_2\mathrm{He} + \mathrm p (energy released: 18.35 MeV)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/7/9/e/79eefdf3a68d2b2fb0a5ecde2723ad76.png

The reactant used a rare isotope of helium known as helium-3 (Ie- 2 protons and 1 neutron in the nucleus). Helium-3 is used to fuse with a deuterium atom (heavy hydrogen) to form the stable Helium-4 and a single proton. Since the proton is positively charged, it can easily be trapped within a magnetic field. The main practical problem with this reaction is that Helium-3 is extremely rare; there are little deposits on Earth, which were mainly found in Uranium mines, which are mostly depleted. The Gundam world's fusion reactors rely on a constant supply of helium imported from the outer solar system planet Jupiter, thus marking the beginning of the Jupiter Energy Fleet. The JEF would travel from Earth to Jupiter, which has a high level of helium-3, and then come back to Earth with the gas. It should be noted that in real physics, helium-3-deuterium fusion produces neutrons due to inevitable deuterium-deuterium reactions. Also, significant quantities of helium-3 were recently discovered on the moon, although there is certainly much more on Jupiter.

The Minovsky Particle

WARNING: The information contained in the following section is a plot element of a work of fiction and is not a real-world scientific theory.

In UC 0065 the Minovsky Physics Society, while working on the reactor, encounter a strange electromagnetic wave effect within the Minovsky-Ionesco reactor that could not be explained by conventional physics. Within the next few years, they identify the cause: a new elementary particle generated by the helium-3 reaction on the inner wall of the reactor, which was named the Minovsky particle or "M" particle. The Minovsky particle has near-zero rest mass - though, like any particle, its mass increases to reflect its potential or kinetic energy - and can carry either a positive or negative electrical charge. When scattered in open space or in the air, the repulsive forces between charged Minovsky particles cause them to spontaneously align into a regular cubic lattice structure called an I-field. An I-Field lattice will slowly expand and scatter into space, however, this will take approximately 29 days before the region can retain normal electromagnetic communication again.

However, the main use of the "M" particle came into combat and communication. When the Minovsky particle is spread in large amount in the open air or in open space, the particle disrupt low-frequency electromagnetic radiation, such as microwaves and radio waves. The "M" particle also interferes with the operations of electronic circuitry and destroys unprotected ones due to their high electrical charge which act like a continuous Electromagnetic Pulse on metal objects. Because of the way Minovsky particles react with those particle types of radiations, radar systems and long-range wireless communication systems became useless, infra-red signals are defracted and decreases accuracy and visible light is fogged. This became known as the "Minovsky Effect".

The disruption of electromagnetic radiation is due to the small lattice of the I-Field creates fringes that long wave length waves cannot penetrate, and diffracts wave lengths that have similar distance with the fringes. This Diffraction and Polarization process disrupts the electromagnetic waves. Notice in real life there is a similar experimental particle that could do the same thing in few thousandth of a second, which is still not practical but proves the theory to be correct. A second utility of the I-field (and Minovsky particles in general) is the repulsion of charged plasma and chargeless Mega particles from an I-field surface, which was of use both in power generation and armament technology. If controlled, the particles can form fringes of different widths and further interfere with electromagnetic waves of shorter wave lengths. This provides the basis for the miniaturizing of fusion reactors installed in Mobile Suits since a controlled I-Field can block the infra-red waves and therefore high temperature from the thermonuclear reaction and reduces the need of coolant and such for the fusion reactors. Without such a field a pilot would be boiled alive in a few nanoseconds and the suit to burst into superheated gasses, thus explaining many of the series' casualties when the reactor of a mobile suit is pierced with a beam weapon powerful enough to disperse this I-Field.

The only counter measure to the "M" particle in the series was to install bulky and expensive shielding on all electronic equipment, but only to counteract the effect it had on electronic circuitry. While this could be done for space ships and naval ships, this ruled out the use of precision guided weapons, such as guided missiles. Due to this, the military use of Minovsky particles ushers in a new era of close-range combat. This is the primary reason for the birth of the Zeon close-combat weapon: the mobile suit.

Minovsky Ultracompact Fusion Reactor

In UC 0071, Zeon researchers created the Minovsky ultracompact fusion reactor. Instead of the conventional magnetic field, this improved version of the Minovsky-Ionesco reactor used an I-field to confine and compress the reactor fuel, triggering a fusion reaction. The Minovsky particles produced as a byproduct of the helium-3 fusion reaction are thus recycled to keep that reaction going. The Minovsky particles that form the I-field lattice also help catalyze the fusion reaction, in a process similar to the muon-catalyzed fusion investigated by real-world scientists during the 1950s. This super-efficient design is only a fifth as large as an equivalently powerful Minovsky-Ionesco reactor, for this reason it was adopted for use on mobile suits as the standard power plant.

The Mega Particle

Due to the repulsive forces between positive and negative Minovsky particles, large amounts of energy are required to compress an I-field lattice. If enough energy is applied, and the I-field is sufficiently compressed, the Minovsky particles ultimately fuse into massive electrically-neutral mega particles. The energy used to create the mega particles is expressed as both mass and velocity. No longer subject to the electrical forces that maintain the I-field lattice, the particles burst out of the electro-magnetic field used to compress them. The weapon requires a second I-field forming a barrel shape to prevent the mega particle from destroying the weapon that fires it. This stream of heavy fast-moving particles, unlike a conventional charged-particle beam, cannot be deflected with magnetic fields. In UC 0070, Zeon researchers exploit this phenomenon to create the fearsome mega particle cannon.

The new weapons derived from Minovsky physics are referred to by the generic term "beam weapons." There are two distinct varieties of beam weapon - one that uses regular Minovsky particles, and another that employs the Mega particles formed by fusing positive and negative Minovsky particles.

Mega Particle Cannon

The ubiquitous mega particle cannon - variously referred to as the beam cannon, mega beam gun, or mega beam cannon - is the standard armament of the Gundam world's warships and mobile armours. This weapon fires a focused beam of massive, high-velocity mega particles, which cannot be deflected by magnetic fields and tears through any conventional armor material. The output power of the Mega Particle Cannon is 4 times greater than conventional Laser weapons at that time and is considered to be more efficient due to most units having semi-transparent coatings on top of their armour which renders Laser weapons virtually useless.

To create the mega particles, a cannon-toting vehicle must first gather Minovsky particles from the vehicle's fusion reactor. The Minovsky particles are collected in a device called an energy condenser, where they are compressed in a high-density I-field until they fuse into mega particles. The performance of the mega particle cannon is thus limited by the reactor's ability to produce Minovsky particles.

Though it quickly became the standard armament of space warships, the mega particle cannon's high energy requirements and the sheer bulk of the energy condenser at first precluded its use in mobile suits. Consequently, the Principality of Zeon's MS-05 Zaku I and MS-06 Zaku II were armed with conventional projectile and missile weapons, rather than beam weapons. As a reference, a Musai Class Light Cruiser's on-board generator requires 15 minutes to compress each shot of mega particle cannon. This was not practical for the mobile suits' smaller reactors to compress mega particles by themselves in combat, since it will take unreasonable amount of time to do so.

etc etc...

Eraclea']It won't be able to lock on and unless you put on bulky and heavy shielding the electronics would be fried. So bye-bye guided missiles, and point defense weaponry, as that the sensors would be fogged and infra-red is inaccurate and unable to get a good lock. It just plain wouldn't be effective.

The stupid is strong with this one. You can see the Gundam with your eyes, thus a video camera can see the Gundam. The video camera sends the picture to the missile's guidance computer, it recognizes the pattern as a threat, the missile follows the Gundam, gets it in range then detonates destroying the Gundam.

And you can burn through jamming with enough energy in your active sensors. If you're putting out 300 kW of jamming it won't do much to stop the 500 GW search radar of the capship's point defence.

From your own godamned link.
Eraclea']WARNING: The information contained in the following section is a plot element of a work of fiction and is not a real-world scientific theory.

Minovsky particles aren't some sort of magic "YOU CAN'T SEE THIS!" device. As is shown in the series themselves, there's nothing preventing optical tracking, or else the mechs themselves would be blinded, not to mention all the times in the series when targetting locks are indeed established.

Well ya... jeeze I never said you can't see me or anything. Just realize that it can make visual identification hard from a far distance. Just relax.

The stupid is strong with this one. You can see the Gundam with your eyes, thus a video camera can see the Gundam. The video camera sends the picture to the missile's guidance computer, it recognizes the pattern as a threat, the missile follows the Gundam, gets it in range then detonates destroying the Gundam.

And you can burn through jamming with enough energy in your active sensors. If you're putting out 300 kW of jamming it won't do much to stop the 500 GW search radar of the capship's point defence.


Its the particle. Not jamming. Two entirely different things. It will fry the guided systems unless they are protected, and this makes them expensive and bulky weapons then.

Eraclea']Named after its inventor, Dr. Y.T. Minovsky, this reactor was "radical" due to the fact that it was the first "clean" fusion reactor, emitting zero neutron radiation. The nuclear equation was:

{}^3_2\mathrm{He} + {}^2_1\mathrm H \to {}^4_2\mathrm{He} + \mathrm p (energy released: 18.35 MeV)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/7/9/e/79eefdf3a68d2b2fb0a5ecde2723ad76.png

The reactant used a rare isotope of helium known as helium-3 (Ie- 2 protons and 1 neutron in the nucleus). Helium-3 is used to fuse with a deuterium atom (heavy hydrogen) to form the stable Helium-4 and a single proton. Since the proton is positively charged, it can easily be trapped within a magnetic field. The main practical problem with this reaction is that Helium-3 is extremely rare; there are little deposits on Earth, which were mainly found in Uranium mines, which are mostly depleted. The Gundam world's fusion reactors rely on a constant supply of helium imported from the outer solar system planet Jupiter, thus marking the beginning of the Jupiter Energy Fleet. The JEF would travel from Earth to Jupiter, which has a high level of helium-3, and then come back to Earth with the gas. It should be noted that in real physics, helium-3-deuterium fusion produces neutrons due to inevitable deuterium-deuterium reactions. Also, significant quantities of helium-3 were recently discovered on the moon, although there is certainly much more on Jupiter.

The Minovsky Particle

WARNING: The information contained in the following section is a plot element of a work of fiction and is not a real-world scientific theory.

In UC 0065 the Minovsky Physics Society, while working on the reactor, encounter a strange electromagnetic wave effect within the Minovsky-Ionesco reactor that could not be explained by conventional physics. Within the next few years, they identify the cause: a new elementary particle generated by the helium-3 reaction on the inner wall of the reactor, which was named the Minovsky particle or "M" particle. The Minovsky particle has near-zero rest mass - though, like any particle, its mass increases to reflect its potential or kinetic energy - and can carry either a positive or negative electrical charge. When scattered in open space or in the air, the repulsive forces between charged Minovsky particles cause them to spontaneously align into a regular cubic lattice structure called an I-field. An I-Field lattice will slowly expand and scatter into space, however, this will take approximately 29 days before the region can retain normal electromagnetic communication again.

However, the main use of the "M" particle came into combat and communication. When the Minovsky particle is spread in large amount in the open air or in open space, the particle disrupt low-frequency electromagnetic radiation, such as microwaves and radio waves. The "M" particle also interferes with the operations of electronic circuitry and destroys unprotected ones due to their high electrical charge which act like a continuous Electromagnetic Pulse on metal objects. Because of the way Minovsky particles react with those particle types of radiations, radar systems and long-range wireless communication systems became useless, infra-red signals are defracted and decreases accuracy and visible light is fogged. This became known as the "Minovsky Effect".

The disruption of electromagnetic radiation is due to the small lattice of the I-Field creates fringes that long wave length waves cannot penetrate, and diffracts wave lengths that have similar distance with the fringes. This Diffraction and Polarization process disrupts the electromagnetic waves. Notice in real life there is a similar experimental particle that could do the same thing in few thousandth of a second, which is still not practical but proves the theory to be correct. A second utility of the I-field (and Minovsky particles in general) is the repulsion of charged plasma and chargeless Mega particles from an I-field surface, which was of use both in power generation and armament technology. If controlled, the particles can form fringes of different widths and further interfere with electromagnetic waves of shorter wave lengths. This provides the basis for the miniaturizing of fusion reactors installed in Mobile Suits since a controlled I-Field can block the infra-red waves and therefore high temperature from the thermonuclear reaction and reduces the need of coolant and such for the fusion reactors. Without such a field a pilot would be boiled alive in a few nanoseconds and the suit to burst into superheated gasses, thus explaining many of the series' casualties when the reactor of a mobile suit is pierced with a beam weapon powerful enough to disperse this I-Field.

The only counter measure to the "M" particle in the series was to install bulky and expensive shielding on all electronic equipment, but only to counteract the effect it had on electronic circuitry. While this could be done for space ships and naval ships, this ruled out the use of precision guided weapons, such as guided missiles. Due to this, the military use of Minovsky particles ushers in a new era of close-range combat. This is the primary reason for the birth of the Zeon close-combat weapon: the mobile suit.

Minovsky Ultracompact Fusion Reactor

In UC 0071, Zeon researchers created the Minovsky ultracompact fusion reactor. Instead of the conventional magnetic field, this improved version of the Minovsky-Ionesco reactor used an I-field to confine and compress the reactor fuel, triggering a fusion reaction. The Minovsky particles produced as a byproduct of the helium-3 fusion reaction are thus recycled to keep that reaction going. The Minovsky particles that form the I-field lattice also help catalyze the fusion reaction, in a process similar to the muon-catalyzed fusion investigated by real-world scientists during the 1950s. This super-efficient design is only a fifth as large as an equivalently powerful Minovsky-Ionesco reactor, for this reason it was adopted for use on mobile suits as the standard power plant.

The Mega Particle

Due to the repulsive forces between positive and negative Minovsky particles, large amounts of energy are required to compress an I-field lattice. If enough energy is applied, and the I-field is sufficiently compressed, the Minovsky particles ultimately fuse into massive electrically-neutral mega particles. The energy used to create the mega particles is expressed as both mass and velocity. No longer subject to the electrical forces that maintain the I-field lattice, the particles burst out of the electro-magnetic field used to compress them. The weapon requires a second I-field forming a barrel shape to prevent the mega particle from destroying the weapon that fires it. This stream of heavy fast-moving particles, unlike a conventional charged-particle beam, cannot be deflected with magnetic fields. In UC 0070, Zeon researchers exploit this phenomenon to create the fearsome mega particle cannon.

The new weapons derived from Minovsky physics are referred to by the generic term "beam weapons." There are two distinct varieties of beam weapon - one that uses regular Minovsky particles, and another that employs the Mega particles formed by fusing positive and negative Minovsky particles.

Mega Particle Cannon

The ubiquitous mega particle cannon - variously referred to as the beam cannon, mega beam gun, or mega beam cannon - is the standard armament of the Gundam world's warships and mobile armours. This weapon fires a focused beam of massive, high-velocity mega particles, which cannot be deflected by magnetic fields and tears through any conventional armor material. The output power of the Mega Particle Cannon is 4 times greater than conventional Laser weapons at that time and is considered to be more efficient due to most units having semi-transparent coatings on top of their armour which renders Laser weapons virtually useless.

To create the mega particles, a cannon-toting vehicle must first gather Minovsky particles from the vehicle's fusion reactor. The Minovsky particles are collected in a device called an energy condenser, where they are compressed in a high-density I-field until they fuse into mega particles. The performance of the mega particle cannon is thus limited by the reactor's ability to produce Minovsky particles.

Though it quickly became the standard armament of space warships, the mega particle cannon's high energy requirements and the sheer bulk of the energy condenser at first precluded its use in mobile suits. Consequently, the Principality of Zeon's MS-05 Zaku I and MS-06 Zaku II were armed with conventional projectile and missile weapons, rather than beam weapons. As a reference, a Musai Class Light Cruiser's on-board generator requires 15 minutes to compress each shot of mega particle cannon. This was not practical for the mobile suits' smaller reactors to compress mega particles by themselves in combat, since it will take unreasonable amount of time to do so.

etc etc...

And when did all these wars happen? All those mobile suits tramping around, I'm afraid I must have napped right through them... OIf course, since it's all a load of very badly thought up fiction, I may have an idea why I don't remember any of this. You ar referring to something that is fiction to make yourcase. By definition, fiction is not real. Since it is a FICTIONAL particle, it is nonexistant. Hooray for basic logical thinking.

From your own godamned link.

Uh wow... And lemee guess, you think Star Wars is real? That is how your shield works? How fusion reactors are compressed and working in your little fighters?

From what I can tell, Gundam has more scientific explaination and theory on how it works then Star Wars and it gives a history on how it works and what the effects are, how it advanced and became into combat.

So Xess, cool your jets, you just looked like a complete idiot.

I'd just like to see a gundam take on anything from Honorverse tech, let alone the Raumreich. Just to get close enough to use those little swords or guns they've have to fly through the impeller wedge propulsion system, which also acts as a kickass shield, what with it basically being a blackhole projected to move the ship along and also obliterate anything that tries to get through.

And even if they fly around it they'd have to get through the point defense system which is made up of supercomputers that track objects (asteroids, missiles, etc) moving at 75,000 km per second and then blast them to bits before they even come close to the ship.

And lets assume they can make it past that. Then there's the hoard of missiles being launched at them combined with armor meant to withstand hundreds of nuclear warhead detonations.

Yea. Mechs are badass.

And when did all these wars happen? All those mobile suits tramping around, I'm afraid I must have napped right through them... OIf course, since it's all a load of very badly thought up fiction, I may have an idea why I don't remember any of this. You ar referring to something that is fiction to make yourcase. By definition, fiction is not real. Since it is a FICTIONAL particle, it is nonexistant. Hooray for basic logical thinking.

He knows its fictional, he's just saying that they'd be probably be deployed in FT mecha combat on NS.

I saw this post and just had to respond, I hope to god someone beat me tearing this apart and even if someone did I'm going to do it anyway because this idiotic pile of filth cannot be allowed to go unpunished.

Come on now. No need for such language. This is a honest, clean debate.

More mass means more momentum and inertia, which means it will be harder to move, which means it will take more energy. Friction will cause energy loss whenever to objects contact eachother. Being space doesn't change any of that.

Not according to my info.

Because of its greater acceleration and speed, the relative mass that a smaller projectile can bring to bear in an attack can be far greater than the destructive power of a larger one.

Note, that's relative mass, not the actual mass we have been discussing.

It's called the cockpit, perhaps you've heard of it?

You forget a fighter only has so much room in it. It can also only get so big before its no longer classified as a fighter.

The basic concept of mecha is flawed, it doesn't matter what kind of tech you have.

Where's your proof? If its just your biased non-fact backed opinion, then keep it to yourself, please.

More surface area means less volume, which means less power. Also more surface area means weaker shields since their effect is more spread out.

Still with the size thing. If you need an honest, RL example, then look at how computers have progressed. They used to be giant, room-sized monsters that could only do basic math. Now we've got ones that fit in the palm of our hands. Can you honestly tell me you think in FT time periods that miniturization will go the other way like you imply?

This is most godamned stupid thing I've seen in ages. Mass has everything to do with space combat, mass dictates the ships momentum and ineria which means that the more massive a ship is the harder it is to move it.

Then explain how something with less mass can have a higher acceleration than something larger.

Your mecha have kiloton range weapons and accelerate at 6000G?

Don't you pull damn non-Lucas backed numbers out on me. I was talking canon, not the fan-wanked SW tech normally used on NS.

The more mass the more inertia, the more inertia the harder it is for a force to move an object. It relates directly to how well a ship can accelerate and maneuver.

Cite your source.

You forget that some nations can fit far more in smaller spaces what lesser nations could. You still forget its quality over quantity.

The second most stupid thing you've said in this post. There is recoil in space due to Conservation of Momentum, if you fling a mass at a certain velocity away it will transfer the same force onto you. Newton's third law.

Then why doesn't every ISD going flying the other way everytime it fires a turbolaser? Then why doesn't the Death Star go blasting backwards when it destroys Alderaan?

Simple, recoil is nullified in the atmospheric vacuum of space.

Or you could make the fighter the size of the mecha and have more volume than the mecha.

Size matters not. A 10mm beam cannon can be just as dangerous, if not more so, than a 50cm rail gun. There's also the added bonus of not needing to waste space with carrying ammo.

Size matters, a massive starship with any apreciable acceleration has to be made of stronger materials than a smaller one just because it is so massive.

Still sticking to close to RL technology. Just because a ship is smaller than a cap ship doesn't mean it can't be made of the same materials and utilize the same technology.

And when did all these wars happen? All those mobile suits tramping around, I'm afraid I must have napped right through them... OIf course, since it's all a load of very badly thought up fiction, I may have an idea why I don't remember any of this. You ar referring to something that is fiction to make yourcase. By definition, fiction is not real. Since it is a FICTIONAL particle, it is nonexistant. Hooray for basic logical thinking.

Again... why are you two being realists when your whole technology is fictional also? Isn't that what FT is. FUTURE-TECH. As is... hasn't HAPPENED, its nothing more then theory and belief.

The fact remains though, I can use lasers and all this other junk, how come I can't use a subatomic particle that is fictional. Most FT nations wank their armor and elements around which have no basis at all for existing.

Ask some FT nation what armor they use, and ask how its created, what's the particle or chemical structure (if a molecule) is. Your gonna get some stupid crap about 'Oh we made it in a lab through proton bombarding and created it'. That's about it. You won't get into proton to neutron ratios or any understanding, what its properties are, or how much it weighes and its behaviors.

Just remember this is fictional, so don't pounce on it when it is CLEARLY fiction.

I'd just like to see a gundam take on anything from Honorverse tech, let alone the Raumreich. Just to get close enough to use those little swords or guns they've have to fly through the impeller wedge propulsion system, which also acts as a kickass shield, what with it basically being a blackhole projected to move the ship along and also obliterate anything that tries to get through.

And even if they fly around it they'd have to get through the point defense system which is made up of supercomputers that track objects (asteroids, missiles, etc) moving at 750,000 km per second and then blast them to bits before they even come close to the ship.

And lets assume they can make it past that. Then there's the hoard of missiles being launched at them combined with armor meant to withstand hundreds of nuclear warhead detonations.

Yea. Mechs are badass.

Whoo for HH Junkies! And all that other badassness!

I'd just like to see a gundam take on anything from Honorverse tech, let alone the Raumreich. Just to get close enough to use those little swords or guns they've have to fly through the impeller wedge propulsion system, which also acts as a kickass shield, what with it basically being a blackhole projected to move the ship along and also obliterate anything that tries to get through.

And even if they fly around it they'd have to get through the point defense system which is made up of supercomputers that track objects (asteroids, missiles, etc) moving at 75,000 km per second and then blast them to bits before they even come close to the ship.

And lets assume they can make it past that. Then there's the hoard of missiles being launched at them combined with armor meant to withstand hundreds of nuclear warhead detonations.

Yea. Mechs are badass.

Why does everyone go to FT wankry and being all defensive about a low-tech mech that is not even created yet? You all sound pathetic, being all defensive about something that is basically HARMLESS.

Btw. Blackholes for propulsion.... how?

Then explain how something with less mass can have a higher acceleration than something larger.

...
Oh good God, have you even taken high school level physics? Put two objects in a vacuum, apply an equal amount of constant thrust to both, and the one that masses the least will accelerate faster, since it has less inertia.

Don't you pull damn non-Lucas backed numbers out on me. I was talking canon, not the fan-wanked SW tech normally used on NS.

LucasFilms canon policy is the movies first, then the ICS books, then everything else. If something isn't contradicted by a higher source, its canon.


Quote:
The more mass the more inertia, the more inertia the harder it is for a force to move an object. It relates directly to how well a ship can accelerate and maneuver.


Cite your source.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inertia

OWNED.


Then why doesn't every ISD going flying the other way everytime it fires a turbolaser? Then why doesn't the Death Star go blasting backwards when it destroys Alderaan?

Simple, recoil is nullified in the atmospheric vacuum of space.

Because they have things to absorb the recoil? If you'd like to explain how recoil doesn't work in a vacuum, please feel free to explain how the space shuttle works.

Come on now. No need for such language. This is a honest, clean debate.



Not according to my info.

Because of its greater acceleration and speed, the relative mass that a smaller projectile can bring to bear in an attack can be far greater than the destructive power of a larger one.

Note, that's relative mass, not the actual mass we have been discussing.



You forget a fighter only has so much room in it. It can also only get so big before its no longer classified as a fighter.



Where's your proof? If its just your biased non-fact backed opinion, then keep it to yourself, please.



Still with the size thing. If you need an honest, RL example, then look at how computers have progressed. They used to be giant, room-sized monsters that could only do basic math. Now we've got ones that fit in the palm of our hands. Can you honestly tell me you think in FT time periods that miniturization will go the other way like you imply?



Then explain how something with less mass can have a higher acceleration than something larger.



Don't you pull damn non-Lucas backed numbers out on me. I was talking canon, not the fan-wanked SW tech normally used on NS.



Cite your source.



Then why doesn't every ISD going flying the other way everytime it fires a turbolaser? Then why doesn't the Death Star go blasting backwards when it destroys Alderaan?

Simple, recoil is nullified in the atmospheric vacuum of space.



Size matters not. A 10mm beam cannon can be just as dangerous, if not more so, than a 50cm rail gun. There's also the added bonus of not needing to waste space with carrying ammo.



Still sticking to close to RL technology. Just because a ship is smaller than a cap ship doesn't mean it can't be made of the same materials and utilize the same technology.

Blatant idiocy in bold. Now, when a Solari Dreadnought fires its rather large and powerful MACs, it may move just a tad in the other direction. On the other hand, when it fires its rather large Grasers, it has a tendency to not move. This is a result of the nature of the weapons involved. Since Turbolasers are beam weapons, they do not cause the ship to move. Until you think, your speaking privileges have been revoked.

Eraclea']Why does everyone go to FT wankry and being all defensive about a low-tech mech that is not even created yet? You all sound pathetic, being all defensive about something that is basically HARMLESS.

Btw. Blackholes for propulsion.... how?

Weren't you the one wanking just a few pages ago about how a gundam could take out a star destroyer "in 30 seconds"?

Eraclea']Why does everyone go to FT wankry and being all defensive about a low-tech mech that is not even created yet? You all sound pathetic, being all defensive about something that is basically HARMLESS.

Btw. Blackholes for propulsion.... how?

Surfer on a perpetual wave. Consider, ponder, and then realize that it's just a big gravity wall pushing you along.

Note, Wedges are not black holes, they are officially described as stressed gravity. What that means, I know not. You'd need to ask someone with a degree.

Quote:
The more mass the more inertia, the more inertia the harder it is for a force to move an object. It relates directly to how well a ship can accelerate and maneuver.


Cite your source.

Sequest... What could possibly be wrong with you?

How in the name of all that is holy could you not understand A BASIC PRINCIPAL OF PHYSICS. Are you even in high school? If you've made it into college then I give up on the American education system. Screw this, I'm moving to Canada.

Surfer on a perpetual wave. Consider, ponder, and then realize that it's just a big gravity wall pushing you along.

Note, Wedges are not black holes, they are officially described as stressed gravity. What that means, I know not. You'd need to ask someone with a degree.


Yeah, he just described it as a black hole for simplicity. It's pretty much the same effect, when something hits it, that something tends to die very fast.

The real problem with giant mechs of death and wankness is that most times people forget about how expensive they really would be.

For the cost of research/development/ and actuall construction I can build a formatable size of tanks.

I dont feel that Mecha is a good idea really, because when you invest that much money in something, and after you get a sizable force. You could upgrade you ground military.

If i were you i would stick to power armor, and small battle suits. But this is just me and if you really want to do it go for it. but just be aware that allot of Ft nations will see it a wanking if you dont rp them properly.

ooc: sry about the spelling... my computer is fubar right now

Giant mecha aren't something for uber mass production, I agree. My ground mecha are small units (smaller than AT-AT's in height, mostly) and are intended to supliment the rest of my ground forces.

Eraclea']Uh wow... And lemee guess, you think Star Wars is real?

Of course I don't think it's real.

That is how your shield works? How fusion reactors are compressed and working in your little fighters?

The same way your fusion reactors are compressed to work in your little mechs I'd wager.

From what I can tell, Gundam has more scientific explaination and theory on how it works then Star Wars and it gives a history on how it works and what the effects are, how it advanced and became into combat.

And all of it is technobabble bullshit. That's not a good thing.

So Xess, cool your jets, you just looked like a complete idiot.

Says the man who cannot grasp simple physics.

Then why doesn't every ISD going flying the other way everytime it fires a turbolaser? Then why doesn't the Death Star go blasting backwards when it destroys Alderaan?

Simple, recoil is nullified in the atmospheric vacuum of space.

I always believed this:

Laser = energy = neglible mass so neglible recoil
Missile = Solid = Depending on launch system, 0 recoil or a good amount of recoil based on mass to mass of ship.
Guns/cannon = solid = recoil because they are launched from the object and would exert a force against the ship equal to the amount to launch the projectile at X speed based on the mass of the projectile against the mass of the ship.

However in space, gravity is not their to balance you so you can counter the effect of the recoil with electromagnetic force or any opposing force equal and opposite of the force being pushed against the ship. I'd have a gun suspended inside the ship in a field that will negate the recoil and auto-load another round.

Weren't you the one wanking just a few pages ago about how a gundam could take out a star destroyer "in 30 seconds"?

Star Destroyers can have their shield generator destroyed and a nuke hit it. Down in 30 seconds.

I haven't insutled anyone till right now asswipe.

Xess, lets try to keep this clean. That is, unless you want the moderators to intervene.

The mecha concept is flawed on the fundamental level. I'll list them in point form so you can follow along easier.

1) The only usable volume is in the chest, most of which is cockpit if you go by Gundam. The mechanisms to move the redicolous arms and legs use up all of the volume in said arms and legs. That leaves very little volume for the important stuff like fuel, life support and reactors.

That's only if you stick to canon for space mecha (which I use construction space mecha only, currently). I for one, don't. I customized and altered my ground mecha to be feasable weapon platforms to supliment the rest of my ground forces.

2) The arms and legs, they add complexity increasing cost and maintenence time while adding to the target cross-section while adding the disadvantage of higher ground pressure when on a planet.

May be true. But consider this, the limbs allow multiple manipulators to be added on things like, say, my construction space mecha.

3) The mecha design means lots of flat plates of armor, which is easier to penetrate than sloped armor.

Using projectile weapons, you may have a point. But, be honest, how many nations equip their fighter craft with rail guns powerful enough to do it?

You want to talk about SW PM me or start a thread in General. I'll tear apart your arguments there so as to not clutter up this thread.

Calm down. Take a deep clensing breath and relax. No need to get hostile.

Now, you do have to admit that 99% of all NS FTers that use SW tech do not use Lucas-canon.

Yeah, he just described it as a black hole for simplicity. It's pretty much the same effect, when something hits it, that something tends to die very fast.

Black Holes never kill in the FT universe. Their properties for warping space time essentially means that unless you are flying straight into it you can just FTL out of it. However the draw-back is you will be X years or whatever ahead. Blackholes can act as time machines essentially. However they don't go backwards in time. :)

Eraclea']Star Destroyers can have their shield generator destroyed and a nuke hit it. Down in 30 seconds.

Those aren't shield generators, they're sensor domes. The only publications that identify them as shield generators are hopelessly erroneous WEG materials and related books that simply lifted stats straight from WEG. This stupidity has sense been overruled by newer and higher canon materials.

The mass of an object has an effect on how force makes the object move, and gravity is force. It simply pulls, whereas propulsion pushes.

In my book, a Newtonian engine is one that requires a reaction mass. The twin ion engines of the SW tech T.I.E. series, for example.

You said that mass doesn't have any effect in zero-gravity locations. I explained that it does, and why it does.

Momentum plays a bigger role in space combat.

Uh-huh. Babylon 5, gotcha.
And what's wrong with using a B5 based tech?

Excellent post Otagia. Also some more general stuff from me, the way mecha are stupid all the time, fighters are stupid in space.

Meh, biased much?

They're essentially just the first stage of a multi-stage missile in space, since fighters don't offer any over-the-horizon ability in space. What's the point of putting a person in the first-stage of a missile when a silicon chip will do?

You've obviously not faced against a RPer whose mastered the art of using fighters. I'm sure one of them out there will be quite willing to whoop your IC arse with their, as you put it, 'manned missiles'.

Also with any given tech you can put a bigger and better version of it on a capship, which means fighters totally lack anyway of harming a capship, this goes for mecha too in case you were wondering.

For the last god damn time, SIZE DOES NOT MATTER!

Fighters only exist because they're more entertaining than missiles.
Not true. A cap ship that carries fighters means it can target an enemy using multiple firing solutions and launch vectors. Let alone how up close and personal fighters can get with cap ships of the uniformed that don't consider them a threat (remember what happened to the first Death Star).

Of course I don't think it's real.
Good.


The same way your fusion reactors are compressed to work in your little mechs I'd wager.


Explain it otherwise quiet down.


And all of it is technobabble bullshit. That's not a good thing.

Technobabble (a portmanteau of technology and babble) is a form of prose using jargon, buzzwords and highly esoteric language to give an impression of plausibility through mystification and misdirection. This is not to be confused with jargon itself, but rather technobabble is a conscious attempt to deliver jargon to outsiders, without insight or comprehensive explanation, to make unsound or unprovable arguments appear to have merit.

Hmm... I don't see jargon, I just see something you don't understand what its trying to talk about. Subatomic elementary particles aren't your thing I guess. Cause the M-particle effectively hits it on the head, except its effectiveness is stretched out far beyond what is currently possible.

Says the man who cannot grasp simple physics.
Rofl. This is not simple physics, its a cross between quantum mechanics, nuclear science and electromagnetic science. Though it seems like you didn't understand it.

Eraclea']Alright, I can put a small fusion or hydrogen reactor in and swap out the grenade launcher for smart missiles I can get a cool little weapon. :D

That's a good start. I suggest you continue to upgrade and develop more 'advanced' versions as you do more R&D IC'ly as your nation gets older in the FT realm.

Those aren't shield generators, they're sensor domes. The only publications that identify them as shield generators are hopelessly erroneous WEG materials and related books that simply lifted stats straight from WEG. This stupidity has sense been overruled by newer and higher canon materials.

Ah I see. Then what about the protruding power bulb on the (I want to say Executor-class SD) that is very exposed, if I shot a FTL Weapon into it, it could be rendered inoperatible for a good length of time if it was powerful enough.

Meh, biased much?

You've obviously not faced against a RPer whose mastered the art of using fighters. I'm sure one of them out there will be quite willing to whoop your IC arse with their, as you put it, 'manned missiles'.

Oh noes, they might toss a few hundred pilots to their deaths...

For the last god damn time, SIZE DOES NOT MATTER!

Actually, yes it does. With increases in size come increases in volume and surface area, which means more space to mount fuel storage, munitions, reactor space, supplies, communications gear, spare parts, smaller vehicles, etc.

Obviously size does matter, or you wouldn't be having your vaunted carriers now would you?

Not true. A cap ship that carries fighters means it can target an enemy using multiple firing solutions and launch vectors.

Which, considering ranges involved, tends to all be the same direction really, plus its not like most ships don't have the armor, shielding, and weapons to deal with threats from multiple attackers.

Let alone how up close and personal fighters can get with cap ships of the uniformed that don't consider them a threat (remember what happened to the first Death Star).

I'd say the lesson learned there is more "design your crap properly" instead of "look out for fighters!"

Eraclea']Ah I see. Then what about the protruding power bulb on the (I want to say Executor-class SD) that is very exposed, if I shot a FTL Weapon into it, it could be rendered inoperatible for a good length of time if it was powerful enough.


Imperator-class are what I believe you're referring to, those are the ones seen commonly in the original moves. And FTL weapons are rather tricky, since yield would be essentially impossible to calculate due to there not being any equations (as far I know) of what happens when an object moving faster than light hits something. But yeah, that bulb is the protrusion of the hypermatter reactor tucked into the hull, and taking it out would cripple the ship, if not destroy it outright due to the release of the energy inside.

That's a good start. I suggest you continue to upgrade and develop more 'advanced' versions as you do more R&D IC'ly as your nation gets older in the FT realm.

Alright. Just remember that updates will be slow, since these early machines are non-combative as seen in: http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=496196

Nothing too much, just peaceful use. Mining and experimenting.

The Fuchikoma-based designs or mechs will be for mining and law and order.

All these will have primary civilian developed technologies that will grow into military applications and evolve over many years. :)

Good lord, I leave to eat for a couple hours, and look what I come back to... Congrats, I think my brain has exploded from some of these comments. I'll address my favorite beacons of stupidity.

First, welcome back to the insanity. I tried my best to keep things as close to an honest, clean debate as I could.

No. Just no. Power armor is just that: Power armor. It is in no way mecha. It merely makes soldiers better. Mecha are gargantuan vehicles with a horridly inefficient means of locomotion. Power armor is a suit of armor that *gasps* makes the wearer more powerful.

Correct. No arguing with the truth.

Erm. No. A tank is vastly more powerful, due largely to its higher speed, larger weaponry, heavy armor, efficient means of locomotion, and cost effectiveness. To think otherwise is silliness.

How are treads more effecient than limbs on a ground mecha? Limbs are easier to armor against weapons fire and aren't as easily damaged as the complex system used with treads.

Wow. Just wow. I have a question: What do you not get about the phrase "of equivalent size?" This means that the fighter is of equivalent size to your mecha, meaning it can mount the same weapons. Now, if we assume equivalent technology (we have to to compare the things, after all), I have more space to mount them in. Simple geometry here. More weapons means I can shoot more things at you.

Looks like I'm straddling the metaphorical fence on this one. I, for one, can see both sides. Unlike a dedicate mecha user or a dedicated fighter user, I use both to compliment each other's strengths and cover each other's weaknesses.

My god, the pain... My brains are bleeding now, you know that? Right, I'm going to have to beat this into your head now: RECOIL DOES NOT MAKE SOUND. LARGE EXPLOSIONS DO. RECOIL MAKES MR. RIFLE KICK YOUR SHOULDER. MR. RIFLE KICKING YOUR SHOULDER HURTS, AND CAN MAKE YOU CRY. Even more importantly, Mr. Rifle causes you to move backwards. An example of the side effects of recoil can be found in Stalin's Orchestra, a massive "super-tank" that knocked itself over when all its guns fired at once, rendering it useless. In space, recoil gets WORSE, as there's no air resistance (or gravity) to stop you, meaning you will KEEP moving backwards at high speeds unless you waste energy to stop yourself.

Then explain things like the following. How an ISD doesn't go backwards when it fires turbolasers? Why doesn't the Death Star go shooting off when it fires its superlaser?

Now, let me address some of the various idiotic comments that came up at once: Firstly, let's define reaction mass. Reaction mass is what you use to make your engines work. Gasoline, hydrogen, antimatter, whatever. Nearly everything needs it. The more you store, the longer you can go, or the faster you can go if you burn a lot of it at once. Due to their piss-poor volume, mecha can store less of it than a fighter.

True, but not all nations use reaction mass type engines (which you cover next).

With ZPMs, you no longer need reaction mass. Bully for you. All this means is that I can pack more ZPMs into the same space. Now my fighter generates more power than your mecha by a extremely large margin (remember, we're judging it with equivalent technology, as there is literally no tech that you can apply to a mech and not a fighter). This means that I can put more energy into weapons, meaning that I hurt you more, more energy into my thrusters (or, as the case may be, grav drive), meaning I can go faster, and more energy into my shields, which means I can take one hell of a bigger beating than you.

Shape plays a bigger role in determining how much can fit if it comes down to equivilant sized mecha and fighters.

This is, of course, assuming your engines use energy, your weapons use energy, and your shields use energy. Of course, you could have a perpetual motion machine that doesn't require any input of power, or your ships could run off of tiny faeries that shit nickels. Who knows.

Meh, keeping this in the realm of physical possibilities for sci-fi based FT (with minimal, if any, blind spots left for things like FTL and drop the magi-tech stuff for the moment), all one needs is a power source that can generate more than enough energy that a fighter, or equivlant sized mecha, would need. A canon ZPM, for example, would over-power both (remember, only three are needed to fully power Atlantis).

Yep, it's confirmed. Brains are bleeding. Blood is leaking out of my ears. WHY, GANTZ?!?

Right, obviously you're not looking at the right fighters. Let's try the dragonfly (http://wiki.esusalliance.co.uk/images/thumb/8/8a/DragonflyIV.jpg/800px-DragonflyIV.jpg). Does THAT look fragile or lightly armed? Also, have you considered that this handy-dandy heat-to-power gadget could be used on *gasp* fighters?

TBH, that's more of a heavy bomber, IMHO. Something like an A-Wing is an interceptor (more focused on speed), something like that is a bomber (more focused on firepower), and fighters are mid-way between the two (powerful balance of speed and firepower).

Right, must look at another topic before Freddy Krueger pops through the screen and PROVES that this is all just a horrible dream.

Roffle-sauce.

I agree with this for the most part, but of course, VERY large volumes of fighters can still put the hurt on capships (two hundred thousand single megaton blasts firing simultaneously is still two hundred gigatons hitting at once). Then there's the opposite end of the spectrum (namely, the Facehuggerian fighter I showed), which is a fighter so expensive most nations would consider it a small capital.

Honestly, who spams fighters like that? Missile spam, I understand. However, fighters carry pilots and shouldn't just be wasted in crappy fighters that can be produced in such high numbers for so cheap.

Actually, yes it does. With increases in size come increases in volume and surface area, which means more space to mount fuel storage, munitions, reactor space, supplies, communications gear, spare parts, smaller vehicles, etc.

Obviously size does matter, or you wouldn't be having your vaunted carriers now would you?

That's all relative. You don't need a lot of extra space if you have set goals and don't need alot of space to use those things.

All very true, especially on NS since it is so fluid. Although even mass swarms of fighters fail against capital ships when you have close to six orders of magnitude or more difference between them in terms of power generation, such as is with my tech or Star Wars (again you want details PM me).

IMHO, I dissagree. Only took one X-Wing to take out the first Death Star, and you can't help but notice the size differential.

And that Facehuggerian fighter would die against a Facehuggerian capital ship. My comparison was assuming equal tech levels. Afterall even a mecha could take out a WWI tank, most of the time anyway.:p

As have been all of my arguements. However, I've actually gone away from canon and RL tech to make them.

Then explain things like the following. How an ISD doesn't go backwards when it fires turbolasers? Why doesn't the Death Star go shooting off when it fires its superlaser?

I already addressed that a couple pages back.

Honestly, who spams fighters like that? Missile spam, I understand. However, fighters carry pilots and shouldn't just be wasted in crappy fighters that can be produced in such high numbers for so cheap.

Exactly.

Quote:
Quote:
The more mass the more inertia, the more inertia the harder it is for a force to move an object. It relates directly to how well a ship can accelerate and maneuver.


Cite your source.


Sequest... What could possibly be wrong with you?

How in the name of all that is holy could you not understand A BASIC PRINCIPAL OF PHYSICS. Are you even in high school? If you've made it into college then I give up on the American education system. Screw this, I'm moving to Canada.

<-- (Gangsta' Edit: I'm reposting this because I'm rather pissed it got ignored.)

Eraclea']Depends on the Mecha and the weapons for if fighters use it. Though a single fighter can down a Star Destroyer shields in a good educated shot. Like those BIG shield generator domes. Size doesn't always matter, but it can.

Those 'domes' are actually part of the SDs/SSDs/USDs sensors, not shields. It was just a coincidence one was shown being destroyed just as the Executor lost her shields. IIRC, that's Lucas-canon.

TBH, I also remember that, in the end, it was a lone A-Wing that managed to take out the Executor.

I dunno about you, but if you are firing a massive cannon in space (solid matter) or even plasma it should have an equal and opposite reaction against the ship. I don't care what BS you say against it, but having a massive continueous stream of energy based weapons is NOT the star wars or any other main tactic in any space battle. Granted the effect is minimal, but the major drain would be on your systems which will overload also.

True. Maintenance is always needed to make sure that, even if your power plant can handle it, the massive amounts of continuous power don't fry the transfer conduits. Thus, why you can never forget your logistics people.

Sequest... What could possibly be wrong with you?

How in the name of all that is holy could you not understand A BASIC PRINCIPAL OF PHYSICS. Are you even in high school? If you've made it into college then I give up on the American education system. Screw this, I'm moving to Canada.

<-- (Gangsta' Edit: I'm reposting this because I'm rather pissed it got ignored.)

It was the second part, about mobility. That's not a true statement in all cases.

Heh. Yes, well, ANYTHING dies to a Facehuggerian capital ship, especially the Trinity classes. Bleeding multi-quadrillion facehugger dreadnoughts...
TBH, I bet I, and maybe some others, could come up with ways to make them say 'ouch', lol.

Those 'domes' are actually part of the SDs/SSDs/USDs sensors, not shields. It was just a coincidence one was shown being destroyed just as the Executor lost her shields. IIRC, that's Lucas-canon.

Also mentioned that an old source had that and was wrong about it. I obviously had my info from that one.

TBH, I also remember that, in the end, it was a lone A-Wing that managed to take out the Executor.

That's also why I think a Gundam can do it to. Nothing beats knowledge of the enemies weaknesses and you can destroy even the toughest ships with relative ease. Just need the right info and the right weapon and the good hit. :D

The hell Metalstorms don't! They've got INSANE recoil from all that ordinance cooking off in under 10 secs. The one time I've seen them used in a realistic manner, the author mandated that the tanks(much better wheelbase than any mech) deploy firing jacks so they didn't flip. Of course, that was an Abrams chasis, but even then. No mech will ever be able to effectively use a Metalstorm system.
Wrong. I've seen TV documentaries and read on-line stuff on Metalstorm technology. A Metalstorm area denial unit has no recoil. I also never read anything about recoil in any other versions of the technology.

TBH, I bet I, and maybe some others, could come up with ways to make them say 'ouch', lol.

Give me their tech info (ALL OF IT) and those ships will be destroyed before they knew what hit them.

Wrong. I've seen TV documentaries and read on-line stuff on Metalstorm technology. A Metalstorm area denial unit has no recoil. I also never read anything about recoil in any other versions of the technology.

It does have recoil, but the firing barrage is so fast that each shot is actually more accurate then the last, the recoil does not effect the firing, but the recoil is still there. I have the videos downloaded on my computer. The recoil is also minimal and it is confined to the box or platform it is firing out of really. Its neglible.

The use of mecha is really a personal choice. Some nations despise them (Xess, for example), and some love them (Thracia). It doesn’t really matter. In the time frames we’re talking about here, technology could be developed that would make them viable. However, any use for them in MT or PMT (besides limited urban stuff) is daft.
As a fence sitter with this whole fighters vs mecha debate, I happen to agree with Talost on this.

Eraclea']Also mentioned that an old source had that and was wrong about it. I obviously had my info from that one.

WEG books are nice but old, and I have a bunch of them, but I'll definitely recommand the SW Incredible Cross Sections books, and the Inside The Worlds series as well. Both series are a lot more detailed and fun to read.

You don't get it do you. A fighter has less range than a missile because the fighter has to save half its fuel so it can go home, a missile does not so it will have longer range than the fighter.
First off, not all fighters are from nations that have fuel based engines.

Second, there are some extreme range fighters out there. For example, the canon X-Wing and every other SW fighter with a Hyperdrive.

Though, why I'm expecting an SD.net supporter to see reason beyond God-wanked SW tech (like what's on SD.net), I'll never know.

As a fence sitter with this whole fighters vs mecha debate, I happen to agree with Talost on this.

ROFL. Ya. Me to kinda.

First off, not all fighters are from nations that have fuel based engines.

Second, there are some extreme range fighters out there. For example, the canon X-Wing and every other SW fighter with a Hyperdrive.

Exactly. Also if your missiles have FTL capabilities....that's sounding a lot like Tanthan. Which would probably mean, your screwed already.

A sound and sober assessment. My problem with mechas is when people assume that I agree with their inflated view of what these things can do and proceed to tell me their dozen gundam warriors are slicing my fleet to ribbons with their energy blades, at which point I'm going to laugh in their faces.

I have no problem with someone treating their mechas as ships, aircraft, or armored fighting vehicles of equal tonnage and/or size to mine, with roughly equivalent capabilities. In that case, I'll be happy to indulge them.
I've said it before and I'll say it again.

In space, my mecha are more construction than combat oriented. My true combat mecha are used to supliment my ground forces.

It doesn't have to exist now. Just because nobody knew about atoms in 2,000 B.C.E. doesn't mean they don't exist.
Also, don't forget that sci-fi stuff like that is made up all the time. Its canon to the Gundam-verse, so it does, technically, exist, in the Gundam-verse.

I've said it before and I'll say it again.

In space, my mecha are more construction than combat oriented. My true combat mecha are used to supliment my ground forces.
The benefits of mecha in space are immeasurable for constructive purposes. Which is weird as so many nations don't see the benefits of them. Does no one RP their resource gathering systems?

The stupid is strong with this one. You can see the Gundam with your eyes, thus a video camera can see the Gundam. The video camera sends the picture to the missile's guidance computer, it recognizes the pattern as a threat, the missile follows the Gundam, gets it in range then detonates destroying the Gundam.

And you can burn through jamming with enough energy in your active sensors. If you're putting out 300 kW of jamming it won't do much to stop the 500 GW search radar of the capship's point defence.

If such was done in canon in the Gundam-verse, then you'll also need to give it the ability to differentiate between your own and the enemy mecha.

Try to weasel your way out of that!

From your own godamned link.
Well no duh, Sherlock. Not all FT is hard core RL science based.

Well no duh, Sherlock. Not all FT is hard core RL science based.

Name 1 FT that is. :P

If such was done in canon in the Gundam-verse, then you'll also need to give it the ability to differentiate between your own and the enemy mecha.

Try to weasel your way out of that!


"Ours aren't shaped like that." or "We don't have mechs."

Done.

*Snip*
And even if they fly around it they'd have to get through the point defense system which is made up of supercomputers that track objects (asteroids, missiles, etc) moving at 75,000 km per second and then blast them to bits before they even come close to the ship.
*Snip*

TBH, compared to my fighters, let alone my offensive missiles, 75,000 Kilometers per second is sloooow.

Eraclea']Again... why are you two being realists when your whole technology is fictional also? Isn't that what FT is. FUTURE-TECH. As is... hasn't HAPPENED, its nothing more then theory and belief.

The fact remains though, I can use lasers and all this other junk, how come I can't use a subatomic particle that is fictional. Most FT nations wank their armor and elements around which have no basis at all for existing.

Ask some FT nation what armor they use, and ask how its created, what's the particle or chemical structure (if a molecule) is. Your gonna get some stupid crap about 'Oh we made it in a lab through proton bombarding and created it'. That's about it. You won't get into proton to neutron ratios or any understanding, what its properties are, or how much it weighes and its behaviors.

Just remember this is fictional, so don't pounce on it when it is CLEARLY fiction.

Actually, a large portion of the armor layers I use actually are found in RL. Carbon nantubes are only one, if not more, of the layers of my armor. I also have another RL material in nantube form, but I'm keeping it under wraps for now.

TBH, compared to my fighters, let alone my offensive missiles, 75,000 Kilometers per second is sloooow.

Ya, that's about .5 light speed. Kinda pointless when you are using near-light speed weaponry. :)

Eraclea']Why does everyone go to FT wankry and being all defensive about a low-tech mech that is not even created yet? You all sound pathetic, being all defensive about something that is basically HARMLESS.

Btw. Blackholes for propulsion.... how?
Its Honoverse (a book series, IIRC) canon. Singularity propulsion is essentially a form of gravitic engine technology. However, I would not describe those uber-wanked shields known as sidewalls as engines, let alone gravitic engines.

TBH, compared to my fighters, let alone my offensive missiles, 75,000 Kilometers per second is sloooow.

Of course, you switch tech-bases whenever something new catches your fancy.

Of course, you switch tech-bases whenever something new catches your fancy.

You describe how superior they are, but they aren't though.

Eraclea']You describe how superior they are, but they aren't though.


They're good enough, considering most FT nations have crap for PD, or what we'd consider point-blank to be the outer limits of their engagement ranges. Of course, the 75,000 kps is the lower limit, assuming the missile starts from rest and doesn't have the warships own velocity to add to it.

Sequest... What could possibly be wrong with you?

How in the name of all that is holy could you not understand A BASIC PRINCIPAL OF PHYSICS. Are you even in high school? If you've made it into college then I give up on the American education system. Screw this, I'm moving to Canada.
Here, I'll explain it once more.

Because of its greater acceleration and speed, the relative mass that smaller projectiles can bring to bear in an attack can be far greater than the destructive power of larger ones

Note: That's relative mass, not absolute mass.

...
Oh good God, have you even taken high school level physics? Put two objects in a vacuum, apply an equal amount of constant thrust to both, and the one that masses the least will accelerate faster, since it has less inertia.

TBH, no. My high school didn't offer a physics class (not that I recall, anyways).

LucasFilms canon policy is the movies first, then the ICS books, then everything else. If something isn't contradicted by a higher source, its canon.

Oh, you mean like the God-wanked crap over on SD.net? 100% of that bull is contradicted by Lucas-canon.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inertia

OWNED.

Here's a little way of subtle pwning I like to call "Yousa wrong!"

Because of its greater acceleration and speed, the relative mass that smaller projectiles can bring to bear in an attack can be far greater than the destructive power of larger ones

Note: That's relative mass, not absolute mass.

Because they have things to absorb the recoil? If you'd like to explain how recoil doesn't work in a vacuum, please feel free to explain how the space shuttle works.

Reaction control thrusters, like the RL MT Orbiter uses are based on Newton's third law, that's correct. Though, you also forget that we are talking FT technology here. Last I checked, FT, unless you were one of those hard science RPers who are in the minority on NS, last I checked, isn't based on what's true today in a MT world.

Eraclea']Also mentioned that an old source had that and was wrong about it. I obviously had my info from that one.



That's also why I think a Gundam can do it to. Nothing beats knowledge of the enemies weaknesses and you can destroy even the toughest ships with relative ease. Just need the right info and the right weapon and the good hit. :D
The A-Wing did it by crashing into the main bridge before shields could be restored and AA fire could be upped to counter that lack. It caused a chain reaction that took down the ship's command systems and caused it to crash into the unfinished Death Star II causing minimal damage to the battlestation.

Now, Eraclea, I suggest you take that quality advice on mecha people have posted and ignore the crap that others that have been attracted to this thread have posted.

As I no longer wish to have to defend myself, my tech, or my beliefs anymore to these damn predators, I'm off. I wish you the best of luck, Eraclea. TG me if you ever want to get me in one of your RPs.

Of course, you switch tech-bases whenever something new catches your fancy.
Look here, you wanky predator. I'm not someone like MM who does stuff like that. I've actually used a single tech core for the majority of my time on NS. The recent shift to a new one is a development of an IC happening.

Now, unless you want me to get the moderators involved, stop the predator routine. I refuse to have to defend myself to the likes of someone like you.

TBH, no. My high school didn't offer a physics class (not that I recall, anyways).

Wow. Well, that explains it then.


Oh, you mean like the God-wanked crap over on SD.net? 100% of that bull is contradicted by Lucas-canon.

Actually, I mean books like the SW ICS for AOTC, the one with the LucasBooks stamp on the cover, and an editor from LucasFilms.



Because of its greater acceleration and speed, the relative mass that smaller projectiles can bring to bear in an attack can be far greater than the destructive power of larger ones.

This doesn't contradict a thing I said. It's simple KE at work.

Reaction control thrusters, like the RL MT Orbiter uses are based on Newton's third law, that's correct. Though, you also forget that we are talking FT technology here. Last I checked, FT, unless you were one of those hard science RPers who are in the minority on NS, last I checked, isn't based on what's true today in a MT world.

In other words, you toss out what you want when you want. There's obvious things like FTL and such, but when you start disregarding basic laws of motion, that's becoming a bit....sloppy.

Look here, you wanky predator. I'm not someone like MM who does stuff like that. I've actually used a single tech core for the majority of my time on NS. The recent shift to a new one is a development of an IC happening.

Now, unless you want me to get the moderators involved, stop the predator routine. I refuse to have to defend myself to the likes of someone like you.

Lulz.

The A-Wing did it by crashing into the main bridge before shields could be restored and AA fire could be upped to counter that lack. It caused a chain reaction that took down the ship's command systems and caused it to crash into the unfinished Death Star II causing minimal damage to the battlestation.

Now, Eraclea, I suggest you take that quality advice on mecha people have posted and ignore the crap that others that have been attracted to this thread have posted.

As I no longer wish to have to defend myself, my tech, or my beliefs anymore to these damn predators, I'm off. I wish you the best of luck, Eraclea. TG me if you ever want to get me in one of your RPs.

Aww okay.... Thanks.

Eastern beliefs are always the best for that situation usually. One suicidal ship could destroy everything, but for some reason I think a nuclear weapon could also do the same thing to.

Well, Eraclea, don't say I didn't warn you! :p

Eastern beliefs are always the best for that situation usually.
Ah. So the comment about a faerie shitting nickels really was true. How odd.

Right, let's ignore the propulsion system then, shall we? We also must assume technology is the same, so the miniaturization argument goes out the window. After all, what you miniaturize to fit in a mecha, I can miniaturize to fit in my fighter, yes? Right, so the below image sums up my argument nicely.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v652/blaesa/example.jpg

Sorry about the quality, but I whipped that up in about a minute using paint. Both the fighter and the mecha are of the same basic dimensions. However, as you can see, the fighter has FAR more volume to devote to power systems, weaponry, whatever you want, really. Meanwhile, the mecha is severely limited in its space, especially due to the fact that the arms and legs must contain the bulky and expensive control systems required to move the limbs. Meanwhile, our masses remain virtually identical due to your need to use more armor to cover your much higher surface area (which, amusingly, you can't even mount external weapons on much of due to interference with the range of motion of your limbs).

Even with grav propulsion mass matters, as more massive objects need a stronger gravity well to pull them in (due to their own gravity well attracting the other gravity well). Thus, more energy from your reactor has to be spent on maintaining this stronger gravity field, and less can be spent on weapons. Of course, with the rather obscene output of ye olde ZPM, this matters little, but little numbers have a tendency of adding up.

Honestly, who spams fighters like that? Missile spam, I understand. However, fighters carry pilots and shouldn't just be wasted in crappy fighters that can be produced in such high numbers for so cheap.
Well, for one, I don't use pilots, instead opting for Avatar vessels. Secondly, I would have phased out fighters long ago (point defense tends to maim them under normal circumstances) if it weren't for the fact that my KK drives make them virtually invulnerable from the frontal arc, meaning they can actually make it to their target and start peppering them with laser fire and SCCAMs.

As for my fighter being too big to call a fighter, fine. My corvette/destroyer/cruiser/battleship is still better than an equivalently sized mecha. :D

And on a final note: All you ever wanted to know about Central Facehuggeria (http://wiki.esusalliance.co.uk/index.php?title=Central_Facehuggeria) can be found either at that link or by digging a bit on ESUSWiki.

Riiiiight. Now, tell me why the thing can't turn its thrusters off? You know, the opposite of on? Hell, even Gundams have to obey the basic laws of physics here. Oh, wait. It's a crappy anime. No they don't. In all seriousness though, Newton's first law. An object in motion tends to stay in motion. Changing your facing does jack unless you then manage to stop yourself and accelerate in the other direction.


From Otagia.

From Me. AMBAC is a real life physic developed by nasa for astronauts. Its not only real life but it allows you to change direction, not just facing in space without using thrust. Why cant it be used on a fighter? Because without JOINTED arms and legs AMBAC is IMPOSSIBLE. Astronauts can actually change which way they move in space. To make a fighter that can move its wings and tail fins exactly like arms and legs.

Well that would be a mecha now wouldnt it. Also changing your direction and weapon facing's faster then your enemy works rather well in getting the edge in firing. AMBAC is made of win.


And 40 foot and under variable mecha [like valkyries] forever. No atmospheric fighter could ever hope to out dog fight one. Ever, period its impossible.
Mecha are IFV's or marine vehicles in the case of Variables.
They do the dirty fighting tanks get powned doing and fighters could not do as well. Dogfighting and establishing beachheads, taking down enemy armour [remember mecha can crouch and crawly and actually present lower profiles.]and assaulting fortifications. Its a one man assault unit. [I use drone ones as well]


Also important on the tanks note. Open field fighting being taller isnt bad. In fact the mecha has a higher elevation for its sensors as well, its possible it can see the tank 6 clicks away behind the hill with its sensors before the tank sees it, and fires destroying the tank.Its broken terrain [not dense like woods or mountains, but rolling hills and high duned deserts. In flat lands its once again, first shot first kill.] that its worse to be tall. Mecha can be short there if they choose..then suddenly pop up when they see a tank coming. Or they can take their rifle and swing it over a building shooting them.

Mecha with secondary movement systems to go faster are actually the equivalent of grav tanks, though higher they can mounts multiple tank weapon systems. Mainly missile or energy weapon choices would be best to reduce recoil problems from big innefficient kinetics.

My own military force, being an almost 100% space based nation is actually based on cruiser weight cap ships with very large long range beam weapons and Variable mecha.

Variable mecha are simply awesome. Make it an aerospace design and it suddenly becomes as tough as a tank..as it has to be to survive in space. Simply flying around in space you need ridiculously tough armour or a damn good force field, as stray bits of metal or say old gloves could take out your 25 million dollar variable fighter.

Variable fighters main deficiency over normal fighters [depending on engines of course] is not traditionally armour, but weapon payload. If your in to mecha with missiles with main weapons [as i am] This means that instead of say 150 missiles, its max payload is 100. This isnt much considering the fact variable mecha could carry two gunpods mounting two fighter weapons that while in humanoid mode [which in space doesnt slow down as it does in atmosphere, especially with leg thrusters] can pretty much face any direction faster then any turret traverse. Only a tank with weapon booms on a turret..or a tread legged mecha... would be able to match its targetting speed.

Variable mecha do pown. Hovertank, grav ship and interceptor/superiority fighter all rolled in one. With a sacrifice in weapon payload. As well dedicated fighters could mount essentially, spinals and make better bombers and gun interceptors.

Other space acclimated mecha could be used as Point defense units, protecting capital ships against enemy missiles and fighters that get to close, and be stored in smaller recesses then traditional fighters. Also they have superior agility [which in point defense firing is IMPORTANT] to sheroid or tubular drone units. AMBAC is once again, made of win.

With gravitic impellors AMBAC becomes possible within gravity fields of planets. Making your Mecha once again, outmaneuver anything out there.
Mecha are agility based, not armour or speed based. Agility of movement and agility of weapon traverse. This is how mecha in FTL should be considered.

Without SMS a IFV designed to simply take things down in assaults, supported by tanks and other aircraft as Mobile suits were in Gundam. [Otagia obviously knows nothing about gundam, in fact Zaku's were found to be dung on the ground, which lead to the hover skating Dom] With SMS a mecha is still best used supported by aircraft and heavy tanks [or at least artillery] as they fulfill the twin roles of assault walker and hover tank [over armed hover tank] as hover tanks are naturally lighter then tanks as well. Doubly you could consider them flying mecha, in which case they double as grav ships.

Of all the mecha only variables [different designs heavy, light, bomber etc there is no catch all] can fight unsupported by more conventional units and tend to lag behind uber specialist units. [IE tank destroyers, fighter interceptors, bombers] at sheer effectiveness at their task. Still they are much more like MBT's in the fact they are meant to engage in anything a ground or air vehicle would need to. [This is FT and flying tanks are possible.]
Heftier price tags are included in this. Remember my nation has 80 000 manned variables at 6.7 billion, 120 000 unmanned ones made from the old MK II version of my current variable [ i have had several] and a totally underfunded newly built civilian run defensive and ground based army with about 10 000 SMS space PDS/assault ground assault mecha as well as 10 000 hover tanks and about 30 000 non variable fighters. Not to mention dropships. This is supporting an army of only 2 million however. So variable mecha and capital ships are expensive..this is definetly one factor of "good" mecha. Because truly excellent all purpose mecha are FT items with some hefty tech components compared to conventional designs.

You can make a better bomber then a variable bomber, or a better interceptor, or a better tank destroyer then a mecha version, or hover artillery then mecha artillery. However mecha are all purpose..versatile. Thats their biggest strength they can do much, with the right equipment.

As for daughter craft being outdone by PDS systems? Well hmm lets put it this way. My nation is good at building fighters. Very good. And we watch the PDS systems of other nations as well as having seen nations that eschew fighters in battle.

We understand the kind of PD out there and we find ways to make sure our fighters stay one step ahead of the PDS. Namely with Jamming equipment and grav shields designed to do just that. And as for mass. This was discussed in the lower payloads of mecha. However over time mecha become much simpler for a people to construct..and micronisation hits things like motive drives and transformation equipment as well as weapons.

You cant instantly say I r have good PD I r bettor, to the guy who's military is 6 times your size ratings wise, RP'd far more then yours has ever been and specialises in large cap ships using Fighters in the same role as frigates and corvettes. Fighter spam works if you have GOOD FIGHTERS. Regardless they be mecha or non mecha.

1000 fighters flying up and launching 100 missiles each with 1 pound of antimatter [a fair bit and enough to hurt a ship as much as a turbolaser] would mean 100 000 missiles for your ships PDS to attack. Even split against three or four ships, if engaging say light cruisers or escorts..the escorts or light cruisers will really have a horrible day. So would super dreadnoughts come to think of it.

Examples of "Bad" Mecha.
Zaku on the ground.
VF 1 valkyrie veritech. [though its incredibly agile its too light to be effective and too much an air plane playing mecha]
Many designs of battlemech Including the Annhilator, Orion, Ceasar, Battlemaster, Thor, Cauldron born, Gargoyle and Man O war. To name a few.
Scout Titans. [too slow no SMS, however shielded. superheavy tanks would smash it apart.]
AT-AT uhhh transport mecha? <.<
Examples of Good mecha.
VF 5 Alpha VF 12 Beta series. [Invid invasion era variables that were made of win]
Zeta Gundam. Variable fighter.
Heavy gears from Heavy gear.
Back pack equipped strike series from Gundam SEED.
Orbital frames [Ubar tech]
Various battlemechs ranging from the masakari to the marauder to the mad cat and avatar as well as loki and Atlas. [Solid bastard]
Doms from MS gundam.
Amoured core's. [Example of heavy flight SMS capable mecha.]
Titans. [Heavily armoured, heavily shielded, super science. ]
Invid mecha in general.
Zentreadi battle pods. [Cheap to produce highly mobile heavily armed, could do with a reinforced pilot compartment.]
Zentreadi officers pod. Nough said.
MAC II.
AT-ST [Little bastard is pown for the same reasons as Zentreadi pods.]

Now guys, stop being dicks and using threads like this to show how much bigger their vocabulary is and look at some of the ideas presented in this as to what mecha actually are, rather then try to compare them to much more specialised vehicles now shall we?

Variable mecha are simply awesome. Make it an aerospace design and it suddenly becomes as tough as a tank..as it has to be to survive in space. Simply flying around in space you need ridiculously tough armour or a damn good force field, as stray bits of metal or say old gloves could take out your 25 million dollar variable fighter.
Great. Now we have someone advocating shape-changing mecha. Need we trot out the logic why these are a terrible idea? We must indeed.

Shape changing mecha are an even worse idea than before. Not only do they essentially acknowledge the superiority of fighters (after all, why else would they want to turn into one?), they are a hideous waste of space. All those mechanisms required to do the whole Transformers gag are INCREDIBLY space-hungry, again limiting your payload, power generation, etc. And I can still put turrets on my fighters, defeating the advantages of "mecha mode."

Also important on the tanks note. Open field fighting being taller isnt bad. In fact the mecha has a higher elevation for its sensors as well, its possible it can see the tank 6 clicks away behind the hill with its sensors before the tank sees it
False logic. By being taller, the mecha increases its profile and thus visibility (both with the mk. I eyeball and more sophisticated sensors), meaning the tank can see it at the same range if not longer.

Mecha are agility based, not armour or speed based. Agility of movement and agility of weapon traverse. This is how mecha in FTL should be considered.
Agility is useless in FT combat. C-frac and laser weaponry make missing a properly aimed shot impossible.

AMBAC is a real life physic developed by nasa for astronauts. Its not only real life but it allows you to change direction, not just facing in space without using thrust. Why cant it be used on a fighter? Because without JOINTED arms and legs AMBAC is IMPOSSIBLE. Astronauts can actually change which way they move in space. To make a fighter that can move its wings and tail fins exactly like arms and legs.
Moving wings on variable geometry fighters transfer weight in exactly the same manner as a human moving his arms. By moving one wing, you can shift your mass to turn, same as a human flapping an arm.

Irregardless, it's still inefficient compared to standard thrusters, gravitic drives, etc. due to energy wasted by the complicated mechanisms. The only reason it's efficient on astronauts is that it doesn't use the energy stored in their suits, instead using their own energy. Mecha pilots don't have this luxury, as a 60 kilogram man CANNOT move a 60,000 kilogram mecha, meaning you're relying on power from your "suit" (or the generator in your mecha, in this case).

However over time mecha become much simpler for a people to construct..and micronisation hits things like motive drives and transformation equipment as well as weapons.
Again, false logic. I can put the same miniaturised systems you use in a mecha in a fighter. Also, how in God's name do you miniaturise transformation equiptment? You're essentially cutting the thing into pieces, having to armor all surfaces that could possibly face the enemy, wasting a HUGE amount of volume. In addition, the pistons/grav engines/tiny nickel shitting faeries that move said pieces are going to have to be pretty damn big as well. A fighter that doesn't have these, nor the extraneous armor that's sitting about inside your craft doing nothing, can mount heavier external armor, more guns, bigger engines, etc.

Eraclea']Uh yes. That's why Gundams exist as warmachines.Uh, no. Unless you can explain what an M-particle is, I'm free to tell you that it doesn't exist and therefore can't work on my spacecraft.

And that's why gundams don't exist as war machines - at least in my canon.It doesn't have to exist now. Just because nobody knew about atoms in 2,000 B.C.E. doesn't mean they don't exist.Ah, well, just because people who want to see spacecraft that look like samurai warriors dominate the futuristic battlefield invent an imaginary particle requiring their use doesn't mean that I have to recognize it.Eraclea']The Minovsky Particle

WARNING: The information contained in the following section is a plot element of a work of fiction and is not a real-world scientific theory...I don't need to read any further. "A plot element of a work of fiction..." says it all.

But just to be a gadfly, let me point out that Helium-3 fusion occurs within the sun. Were the M-particle real, then no main-sequence star would ever emit radio waves. Since they all do (ever heard of radio astronomy?!?), the M-particle as posited in the Gundam universe can not exist. Q.E.D.Eraclea']From what I can tell, Gundam has more scientific explaination and theory on how it works then Star Wars and it gives a history on how it works and what the effects are, how it advanced and became into combat.If you assume the existence of the Minovsky Particle; if you don't it all comes apart.

As for a stupid space opera invented by a Saturday afternoon matinee fan (Star Wars), why is that the only alternative? You're roasting a straw man.Eraclea']The fact remains though, I can use lasers and all this other junk, how come I can't use a subatomic particle that is fictional. Most FT nations wank their armor and elements around which have no basis at all for existing.Because your subatomic particle is explicitly designed to make every other player build miltary forces that are just like yours, i.e., are based on mecha.

Imagine if I were to build an NS nation based on Redmond Simonsen's SF game Starforce "Alpha Centauri" and the Universe RPG that came from that. In this universe, space combat is primarily psychic (at the fleet level, it always is): warships are loaded with individuals (all women, BTW) who are trained in psychic aportation; they sieze the enemy warships with their minds and hurl them dozens of light years away in random directions. Same for missiles, fighters, etc. Typical engagement ranges are half a light year, so non-psychic weapons never come into play.

When the enemy has been hurled away from the target system, the invader closes and sends a huge pulse of psychic energy planetside, knocking unconscious the entire population. Troops are then landed and all defenses are "defanged". When the population wakes up, they're under new management.

Now, were I to do that, you would be forced to either respond in kind or surrender. Either way, your mecha would be worthless. So here's my question: if I did this, would you have to accept it?

Of course not, because I don't have the right to force my sci-fi future on you. Consequently, I have every right to ignore your M-particle, because if I didn't, I'd have to build my military around mecha, and I'd sooner drink bleach.

Ah. So the comment about a faerie shitting nickels really was true. How odd.[Quote]

Reference to Eastern philosophy about war, its better to die a hero then retreat in shame. I.E. Vietnam, China, Japan's (most notably Japan) for suicidal attacks in bad situations.
[QUOTE]
Right, let's ignore the propulsion system then, shall we? We also must assume technology is the same, so the miniaturization argument goes out the window. After all, what you miniaturize to fit in a mecha, I can miniaturize to fit in my fighter, yes? Right, so the below image sums up my argument nicely.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v652/blaesa/example.jpg

Agreed, but the propulsion system has to be different for a mech as it has more control then a fighter to turn and spin. A fighter notably has to turn all the way around to redirect, unless your fighter magically has its body swing around the cockpit to redirect to enemy fire in addition to all the other systems. :)

Sorry about the quality, but I whipped that up in about a minute using paint. Both the fighter and the mecha are of the same basic dimensions. However, as you can see, the fighter has FAR more volume to devote to power systems, weaponry, whatever you want, really. Meanwhile, the mecha is severely limited in its space, especially due to the fact that the arms and legs must contain the bulky and expensive control systems required to move the limbs. Meanwhile, our masses remain virtually identical due to your need to use more armor to cover your much higher surface area (which, amusingly, you can't even mount external weapons on much of due to interference with the range of motion of your limbs).

Actually your wrong. If you were to have the same volume your fighter would need to be half the size. As you recall its volume so its the product of width x height x length. You have width and height accounted for, but the mechs I am using are 4 ft wide and 6-9 ft high by 4 ft in length. This is much smaller then most fighters. If it would be the same size a fighter would not be able to hold all this extra equipment for the space if you are following the traditional fighter sits in a cockpit in a comfortable and relaxed position. Like in a reclining chair. Ours will be more like embraced on a stool within the mech as the power core rests against their backs, weapons near their arms, legs, chest and back. Communication for the head and shoulders. Angular slanted and semi-transparent shielding (that comes also from the gundam and other conan universes) to provide better protection.

I'm not going to get into stealth here, but just remember very few fighters employ that technology if their systems are capable of doing so. Even fewer employ optical dupping or cloaking. So that is moot, but just realize a mechs signature will be smaller then a fighters in any event.

Who ever said controls had to be bulky and expensive? You can use an electromagnetic ball and socket motion and other makeup for the joints on a very small scale. Remember the movement is capable in todays robots, why wouldn't it be in the future? As long as you are capable of employing it, its not a big step up from an advanced fighter.

Lastly, I don't need to use a large amount of armor, doing so is pointless and restrictive. You need to keep range of motion as fluidic as possible. On all the gundams what you see is not armor, but protection for the systems and also what you see is a lack of miniturization. I can mount external or internal weapon systems, and although it will be packed together the ability to wield other weapons as needed allows for a mech to fulfill various jobs without requiring a new unit.

Even with grav propulsion mass matters, as more massive objects need a stronger gravity well to pull them in (due to their own gravity well attracting the other gravity well). Thus, more energy from your reactor has to be spent on maintaining this stronger gravity field, and less can be spent on weapons. Of course, with the rather obscene output of ye olde ZPM, this matters little, but little numbers have a tendency of adding up.


Well, for one, I don't use pilots, instead opting for Avatar vessels. Secondly, I would have phased out fighters long ago (point defense tends to maim them under normal circumstances) if it weren't for the fact that my KK drives make them virtually invulnerable from the frontal arc, meaning they can actually make it to their target and start peppering them with laser fire and SCCAMs.

As for my fighter being too big to call a fighter, fine. My corvette/destroyer/cruiser/battleship is still better than an equivalently sized mecha. :D

And on a final note: All you ever wanted to know about Central Facehuggeria (http://wiki.esusalliance.co.uk/index.php?title=Central_Facehuggeria) can be found either at that link or by digging a bit on ESUSWiki.

Ok

Great. Now we have someone advocating shape-changing mecha. Need we trot out the logic why these are a terrible idea? We must indeed.

Shape changing mecha are an even worse idea than before. Not only do they essentially acknowledge the superiority of fighters (after all, why else would they want to turn into one?), they are a hideous waste of space. All those mechanisms required to do the whole Transformers gag are INCREDIBLY space-hungry, again limiting your payload, power generation, etc. And I can still put turrets on my fighters, defeating the advantages of "mecha mode."[Quote]

Agreed, transforming only works if you are willing to sacrifice everything for it. Even then its a stupid idea. Too limiting for usage.


[QUOTE]False logic. By being taller, the mecha increases its profile and thus visibility (both with the mk. I eyeball and more sophisticated sensors), meaning the tank can see it at the same range if not longer.

Moot point. Even in modern combat with advanced systems you never need to see the enemy to get a lock and get a kill. A missile will still take out whatever target based on its guidance systems with high accuracy.


Agility is useless in FT combat. C-frac and laser weaponry make missing a properly aimed shot impossible.

Ya sure, when you are fighting over the distance of several light-seconds. Who are you to say that a shot is impossible? Also do note that laser shielding which seems to be missing on every Star Wars tech, Star Trek tech or anything is basically strange. Lasers are strong, but they are still light and cold plasma will still stop it. I can defeat your lasers as quick as you can fire them. Not to mention it can be self-contained and recycled, giving it stealth capability and great protection from energy based weapons.


Moving wings on variable geometry fighters transfer weight in exactly the same manner as a human moving his arms. By moving one wing, you can shift your mass to turn, same as a human flapping an arm.

Not as effective and by doing so you essentially bring up the complexity for a small bonus which will never be as good as the mech. If you are flying towards a mech, shooting and the mech turns and flies down and spins around as you zoom overhead and try to turn, guess who's butt is already toast? Unless you hit that mech a lot and destroyed it (unlikely as its just so agile and unpredictable for human or machines to predict its next movement across large distances) that mech is gonna destroy YOU. Unlike fighters, the ability to change direction on a mech is just too great to pass up.

Irregardless, it's still inefficient compared to standard thrusters, gravitic drives, etc. due to energy wasted by the complicated mechanisms. The only reason it's efficient on astronauts is that it doesn't use the energy stored in their suits, instead using their own energy. Mecha pilots don't have this luxury, as a 60 kilogram man CANNOT move a 60,000 kilogram mecha, meaning you're relying on power from your "suit" (or the generator in your mecha, in this case).

Rofl. And no man is capable of moving a fighter on his own or powering it. Moot point. Besides standard thrusters are all a mech needs. Also power systems in FT are much higher then MT. Again a moot point.

Again, false logic. I can put the same miniaturised systems you use in a mecha in a fighter. Also, how in God's name do you miniaturise transformation equiptment? You're essentially cutting the thing into pieces, having to armor all surfaces that could possibly face the enemy, wasting a HUGE amount of volume. In addition, the pistons/grav engines/tiny nickel shitting faeries that move said pieces are going to have to be pretty damn big as well. A fighter that doesn't have these, nor the extraneous armor that's sitting about inside your craft doing nothing, can mount heavier external armor, more guns, bigger engines, etc.

Again transforming is weak.

(I think in the end we can all agree on one thing... sexual chocolate.)

Examples of "Bad" Mecha.
Zaku on the ground.
VF 1 valkyrie veritech. [though its incredibly agile its too light to be effective and too much an air plane playing mecha]
Many designs of battlemech Including the Annhilator, Orion, Ceasar, Battlemaster, Thor, Cauldron born, Gargoyle and Man O war. To name a few.
Scout Titans. [too slow no SMS, however shielded. superheavy tanks would smash it apart.]
AT-AT uhhh transport mecha? <.<
Examples of Good mecha.
VF 5 Alpha VF 12 Beta series. [Invid invasion era variables that were made of win]
Zeta Gundam. Variable fighter.
Heavy gears from Heavy gear.
Back pack equipped strike series from Gundam SEED.
Orbital frames [Ubar tech]
Various battlemechs ranging from the masakari to the marauder to the mad cat and avatar as well as loki and Atlas. [Solid bastard]
Doms from MS gundam.
Amoured core's. [Example of heavy flight SMS capable mecha.]
Titans. [Heavily armoured, heavily shielded, super science. ]
Invid mecha in general.
Zentreadi battle pods. [Cheap to produce highly mobile heavily armed, could do with a reinforced pilot compartment.]
Zentreadi officers pod. Nough said.
MAC II.
AT-ST [Little bastard is pown for the same reasons as Zentreadi pods.]

Now guys, stop being dicks and using threads like this to show how much bigger their vocabulary is and look at some of the ideas presented in this as to what mecha actually are, rather then try to compare them to much more specialised vehicles now shall we?


How are those models of battlemech any worse than the other models you named? Would you prefer someone use a Pack Hunter, Hatchetman, or that weirdass spidermech? Or maybe a Madcat? What makes the heavy and assault mechs you listed any worse than the others listed later? In universe, you don't fuck with the Cauldron Born, and definitely not with the Atlas or Annhilator.

And how are ACs, which are mostly rather fragile compared to even the horribly thought out Battlemechs, any good? I mean, they're cool to look at, and semi-realistic in their fragility. And I guess arguing with an assault AC weilding a Karasawa wouldn't be much fun, but still. Compare that to my hovertank of choice. Big plasma gun, enough armor to shrug off hits from reasonably sized AT weapons. And that's just a regular tank. Not even a SHBT, which could simply roll over any mech short of a titan, like an abrams rolls over a person.

Uh, no. Unless you can explain what an M-particle is, I'm free to tell you that it doesn't exist and therefore can't work on my spacecraft.

Essentially the M-particle is a missing elementary particle, that is released when the clean reaction happens, as energy is released their is also a chance that in rare cases something else may happen and a subatomic particle will be thrown out. Well... since it effects electromagnetic and visible light on some scale, it has to be a boson or a particle with a high sign.

I'm guessing its an anti-boson, one that eliminates electromagnetic charges, but it wouldn't hold true.

The only other option I can think of is its NOT an elementary particle as in Quarks or Bosons or Leptons. It is instead a combination of DDD Quarks that have a high charge, this unnaturally high charge would deflect and throw off electromagnetic fields, destroy components and wreck electrical havoc and would try to avoid all positive charges (like the protons).

Of course this will be complimented by a positive particle that would fit in the Mega weapons system. So there you have your M-particle. Which would work. Happy?



And that's why gundams don't exist as war machines - at least in my canon.Ah, well, just because people who want to see spacecraft that look like samurai warriors dominate the futuristic battlefield invent an imaginary particle requiring their use doesn't mean that I have to recognize it.I don't need to read any further. "A plot element of a work of fiction..." says it all.

Umm sure... they samurais....

But just to be a gadfly, let me point out that Helium-3 fusion occurs within the sun. Were the M-particle real, then no main-sequence star would ever emit radio waves. Since they all do (ever heard of radio astronomy?!?), the M-particle as posited in the Gundam universe can not exist. Q.E.D.If you assume the existence of the Minovsky Particle; if you don't it all comes apart. Effects would be neglibile and unnoticable because of the rarity (one charge per 15 mins on the reactor) and since its just one particle and the sun is huge it wouldn't be noticible.

Gundams use charges on their weapons, they don't charge them themselves, it would take way too long.


As for a stupid space opera invented by a Saturday afternoon matinee fan (Star Wars), why is that the only alternative? You're roasting a straw man.Because your subatomic particle is explicitly designed to make every other player build miltary forces that are just like yours, i.e., are based on mecha.
Not entirely. The fact I can use it though is a threat no more then any other FT nation.


Imagine if I were to build an NS nation based on Redmond Simonsen's SF game Starforce "Alpha Centauri" and the Universe RPG that came from that. In this universe, space combat is primarily psychic (at the fleet level, it always is): warships are loaded with individuals (all women, BTW) who are trained in psychic aportation; they sieze the enemy warships with their minds and hurl them dozens of light years away in random directions. Same for missiles, fighters, etc. Typical engagement ranges are half a light year, so non-psychic weapons never come into play.

Some people don't play with psychics or Jedi either. So what.

When the enemy has been hurled away from the target system, the invader closes and sends a huge pulse of psychic energy planetside, knocking unconscious the entire population. Troops are then landed and all defenses are "defanged". When the population wakes up, they're under new management.

No force of their own, what's this, pick on defenseless people?

Now, were I to do that, you would be forced to either respond in kind or surrender. Either way, your mecha would be worthless. So here's my question: if I did this, would you have to accept it?


Brash huh, you know how pathetic that sounds, it wouldn't fly in NS, as you have no reason to attack someone. Jeeze. Besides you can use psychic weapons or have a null field that prevents it.

Of course not, because I don't have the right to force my sci-fi future on you. Consequently, I have every right to ignore your M-particle, because if I didn't, I'd have to build my military around mecha, and I'd sooner drink bleach.

You don't like playing then. You only want to win and do what YOU want, even though its not fair to others.

How are those models of battlemech any worse than the other models you named? Would you prefer someone use a Pack Hunter, Hatchetman, or that weirdass spidermech? Or maybe a Madcat? What makes the heavy and assault mechs you listed any worse than the others listed later? In universe, you don't fuck with the Cauldron Born, and definitely not with the Atlas or Annhilator.

And how are ACs, which are mostly rather fragile compared to even the horribly thought out Battlemechs, any good? I mean, they're cool to look at, and semi-realistic in their fragility. And I guess arguing with an assault AC weilding a Karasawa wouldn't be much fun, but still. Compare that to my hovertank of choice. Big plasma gun, enough armor to shrug off hits from reasonably sized AT weapons. And that's just a regular tank. Not even a SHBT, which could simply roll over any mech short of a titan, like an abrams rolls over a person.

All things are relative. :D

Eraclea']You don't like playing then. You only want to win and do what YOU want, even though its not fair to others.LOL. No, it's simpler than that. If I allow mecha fans to define what mecha can do, then I must automatically concede all battles in advance to such people, because by their impression of things, mecha can only be defeated by other mecha, and since I think mecha are stupid and refuse to employ them, I will always lose.

If the rules of the game are, "Thou shalt have mecha or thou art toast", then I refuse to play. That's not a matter of insisting on winning every fight; it's a matter of refusing to agree to lose every fight to children who enjoy ridiculous Japanese comic books.

No, there is no M-particle. Period. You want to use mecha, then they fight exactly the same way as other spacecraft of equivalent size or mass. If that's not good enough for you, too bad. At least it keeps everyone on an even keel and makes RP possible without everyone agreeing that FT=anime, which is extremely disrespectful of the great body of genuine sci-fi out there.

LOL. No, it's simpler than that. If I allow mecha fans to define what mecha can do, then I must automatically concede all battles in advance to such people, because by their impression of things, mecha can only be defeated by other mecha, and since I think mecha are stupid and refuse to employ them, I will always lose.

If the rules of the game are, "Thou shalt have mecha or thou art toast", then I refuse to play. That's not a matter of insisting on winning every fight; it's a matter of refusing to agree to lose every fight to children who enjoy ridiculous Japanese comic books.

No, there is no M-particle. Period. You want to use mecha, then they fight exactly the same way as other spacecraft of equivalent size or mass. If that's not good enough for you, too bad. At least it keeps everyone on an even keel and makes RP possible without everyone agreeing that FT=anime, which is extremely disrespectful of the great body of genuine sci-fi out there.


No one gave that impression and you are being a poor sport. I can use the M-particle or its RL equivolent if I damn well please to.

If you even considered for a moment about watching or reading the good sci-fi out of Japan you'll realize they are ahead of most sci-fi writers of our time. Asimov is gone and Lucas is going into another 20 year hibernation.

Thing to remember lots of anime do have mechanical models to match RL possibilities and they all have drawbacks. Most FT machines and ships are taken from poor information and have essentially nil on how it works.

Face it. The M-particle can be renamed. You are the one acting like a child in the face of quantum physics. If you can create FTL drives and other goodies, then surely you can find a way to make radar, sonar, millimeter-sonar, infrared and all other forms of electromagnetic communication and detection impossible.

LOL. No, it's simpler than that. If I allow mecha fans to define what mecha can do, then I must automatically concede all battles in advance to such people, because by their impression of things, mecha can only be defeated by other mecha, and since I think mecha are stupid and refuse to employ them, I will always lose.

If the rules of the game are, "Thou shalt have mecha or thou art toast", then I refuse to play. That's not a matter of insisting on winning every fight; it's a matter of refusing to agree to lose every fight to children who enjoy ridiculous Japanese comic books.

No, there is no M-particle. Period. You want to use mecha, then they fight exactly the same way as other spacecraft of equivalent size or mass. If that's not good enough for you, too bad. At least it keeps everyone on an even keel and makes RP possible without everyone agreeing that FT=anime, which is extremely disrespectful of the great body of genuine sci-fi out there.

I have to make an argument in favor of mecha!!!! I hate myself now!!!!!

Anyway, only the Gundams insist on the existence of the wankparticle. By your argument, 'mechs, ACs, MTs, and other similar units would be acceptable. Of course, any 'mech fan knows that 'mechs are vulnerable to alot of hot weapons(napalm rockets vs Atlas equals Atlas DEAT), ACs lose to MTs, and other more mass produced units like tanks, on a regular basis, and MTs are meat. Balance-wise, those units would be less of a problem than anime mechs.

*goes to bathe in sulfuric acid now*

If you even considered for a moment about watching or reading the good sci-fi out of Japan you'll realize they are ahead of most sci-fi writers of our time. Asimov is gone and Lucas is going into another 20 year hibernation.
You call Lucas a good sci-fi writer? Hell, he doesn't even write true sci fi! Most manga is drivel, especially Gundam and most other mecha series. Read Ian M Banks, Jerry Pournelle and Larry Niven, then we'll talk. Sci fi is alive and well outside of Japan.

Face it. The M-particle can be renamed. You are the one acting like a child in the face of quantum physics. If you can create FTL drives and other goodies, then surely you can find a way to make radar, sonar, millimeter-sonar, infrared and all other forms of electromagnetic communication and detection impossible.
One wonders how sonar gets stuck in there, what with it being sound based and all...


Thing to remember lots of anime do have mechanical models to match RL possibilities and they all have drawbacks. Most FT machines and ships are taken from poor information and have essentially nil on how it works.
One also might remember that Gundam isn't one of those animes, what with the silly designs and fighter-sized mecha taking out battleships with a single swipe of their light sabre.

Sorry for the delay.

Not according to my info.

Because of its greater acceleration and speed, the relative mass that a smaller projectile can bring to bear in an attack can be far greater than the destructive power of a larger one.

Note, that's relative mass, not the actual mass we have been discussing.

If I read this correctly you're talking about a high velocity, low mass projectile can be just as deadly as a low velocity/high mass projectile. There's nothing wrong with that, but woth more power you can launch a high mass projectile at high velocties to do even more damage.

You forget a fighter only has so much room in it. It can also only get so big before its no longer classified as a fighter.

I already pointed out that a modern jet fighter is as large as a Gundam.

Where's your proof? If its just your biased non-fact backed opinion, then keep it to yourself, please.

It is based on basic principles of geometry and physics. Seriously a kid in Grade 9 could do figure this out.

Still with the size thing. If you need an honest, RL example, then look at how computers have progressed. They used to be giant, room-sized monsters that could only do basic math. Now we've got ones that fit in the palm of our hands. Can you honestly tell me you think in FT time periods that miniturization will go the other way like you imply?

I was not reffering to the number of emmiters but to the area the shield has to protect. The more area a shield has to protect the weaker it is if they have the same power supply. Since a fighter is large enough to mount a mecha powerplant and has less surface area its shields would be stronger than the mecha's.



Then explain how something with less mass can have a higher acceleration than something larger.

If a force of 100 Newtons is applied to both a 1 kg object and a 100 kg object the 1 kg object will accelerate faster because it has less mass. The equation is F=m*a, thus the 1 kg object will accelerate at 100 m/s^2 while the 100 kg object will accelerate at only 1 m/s^2 even though both had the same force applied to them. If you take the main engines off a mecha and put them in a fighter(they will fit) the fighter will accelerate faster as it has less mass than the mecha does.

Don't you pull damn non-Lucas backed numbers out on me. I was talking canon, not the fan-wanked SW tech normally used on NS.

Unfortunately for you those figures are derived from the movies, the highest of the canon. Just because you can't understand that doesn't mean it isn't true.

Cite your source.

I can't remember the name of if but it was my Grade 5 science book.

Then why doesn't every ISD going flying the other way everytime it fires a turbolaser? Then why doesn't the Death Star go blasting backwards when it destroys Alderaan?

The momentum of a massless particle beam (such as a laser or turbolaser) is governed by the equation U=e/c, where U is the momentum, e is the energy of the beam and c is the speed of light. Thus even the 198 teraton blast of a ISD HTL only has a momentum of 2.77 Peta-Newtons, which the massive turret is braced against the ISD's great mass and its vast engine power.

The Death Star doesn't go flying backwards because it counters the superlaser momentum with its engines. A very impressive feat.

Simple, recoil is nullified in the atmospheric vacuum of space.

When you pass grade 5 science come back and talk.

Size matters not. A 10mm beam cannon can be just as dangerous, if not more so, than a 50cm rail gun.

If the 10mm beam cannon carries more energy than the 50cm rail gun, you are correct. However size does indeed matter, since volume increases with the cube rather than the square the volume to surface area ration will be much higher in large ships than on small ones. This means more ammo, more reactor and fuel, which means stronger shields and more powerfull weapons.


Still sticking to close to RL technology. Just because a ship is smaller than a cap ship doesn't mean it can't be made of the same materials and utilize the same technology.

Very true, but the smaller ship will have less armor and less power than the larger one.

IMHO, I dissagree. Only took one X-Wing to take out the first Death Star, and you can't help but notice the size differential.

Due to a design flaw and Tarkin's arrogance. If that flaw had not been there the fighters could have spent thousands of years blasting at the Death Star and done nothing more than scratch the finish.

TBH, I also remember that, in the end, it was a lone A-Wing that managed to take out the Executor.

It took out the main bridge damaging helo control. Had the engines not misfired it would have continued on in the fight from the secondary bridge.

May be true. But consider this, the limbs allow multiple manipulators to be added on things like, say, my construction space mecha.

Which is absolutely pointless. Jack-of-all-trades designs are never as good at a specific task as a dedicated platform.

Now, you do have to admit that 99% of all NS FTers that use SW tech do not use Lucas-canon.

Indeed, if they did they would never lose to people who use Honorverse, Star Trek, Babylon 5, WH40K...




And I'll gladly swat them out of the sky with point defence while their weapons do jack all for damage against my ship.


[quote]For the last god damn time, SIZE DOES NOT MATTER!

As I said before, size does matter. Bigger ship means more volume, which means more room for power generation, which means more powerfull shields and weapons.


Not true. A cap ship that carries fighters means it can target an enemy using multiple firing solutions and launch vectors. Let alone how up close and personal fighters can get with cap ships of the uniformed that don't consider them a threat (remember what happened to the first Death Star).

Yeah, Force sensitive pilot managed to exploit a design flaw that only Tarkin's extreme arrogance allowed to be exploited. And it doesn't matter how many vectors you can attack from with fighters since their weapons aren't powerfull enough to damage a cap ship anyway.

First off, not all fighters are from nations that have fuel based engines.

In this case fuel was reffering to energy, energy is required to run the weapons. However you imagine it, half the fighters propulsion energy will have to be saved to get home, giving the missile longer range.

Second, there are some extreme range fighters out there. For example, the canon X-Wing and every other SW fighter with a Hyperdrive.

They all have short range hyperdrives compared to capital ships or Galaxy Gun missiles.

Balance-wise, those units would be less of a problem than anime mechs.Non-anime mecha (eg., StarCraft's Goliath, SW's AT-AT, etc.) represent no problem to play balance. Gundams can not be used in balanced fashion if you follow canon; hence using them at the strength their proponents insist they have is incompatible with anybody using anything else unless the rest of us are masochistic enough to want to be victims. H_ll, we'd might as well permit the use of superheroes.Eraclea']I can use the M-particle or its RL equivolent if I damn well please to.And I can ignore them - or their non-existent RL equivalent - if I want to.Eraclea']If you even considered for a moment about watching or reading the good sci-fi out of Japan you'll realize they are ahead of most sci-fi writers of our time. Asimov is gone and Lucas is going into another 20 year hibernation.I'm sorry, but you're not allowed to use the words "Lucas" and "sci-fi" in the same sentence. As for Asimov, he was never more than mediocre. If that's how you define science fiction, no wonder you like anime (shudder).

Lois McMaster Bujold (http://www.dendarii.com/), C.J. Cherryh (http://www.cherryh.com/), Ben Bova (http://www.benbova.com/), David Weber (http://www.davidweber.net/), Greg Bear (http://www.gregbear.com/), Frederick Pohl (http://www.frederikpohl.com/), and a host of others can write circles around your Japanese authors. Their work is real sci-fi; anime is swill.Eraclea']If you can create FTL drives and other goodies, then surely you can find a way to make radar, sonar, millimeter-sonar, infrared and all other forms of electromagnetic communication and detection impossible.But strangely, not visible light - which, equally strangely, machines can not use. Thus quantum computers, optical fiber links, and lidar don't exist, while this bogus M-particle must be excepted by all because it makes your favorite weapon, the gundam, master of the battlefield. We all have to meekly agree to be pwned by you and your ilk, so that you can be happy as masters of the cheap adolescent-pulp anime universe that you think awaits all of us down the road (shudder).

Not on your life.

Here's my suggestion: we create a new RP category: anime. You want your silly gundams, go play there.

If that's how you define science fiction, no wonder you like anime (shudder).
Now now. A lot of anime is good. It's just that shows like Gundam Wing give it a bad name. Yami no Matsuei, Elfen Lied and Gantz are quite good, along with several others such as Scrap Princess (I think. Only seen two episodes at my school's Pot Luck night :D), and FLCL. Please, don't let Gundam drag down the rest of the over-genre.

This message has been sponsored by the William Woods University Anime Club. :D

Now now. A lot of anime is good. It's just that shows like Gundam Wing give it a bad name. Yami no Matsuei, Elfen Lied and Gantz are quite good, along with several others such as Scrap Princess (I think. Only seen two episodes at my school's Pot Luck night :D), and FLCL. Please, don't let Gundam drag down the rest of the over-genre.

This message has been sponsored by the William Woods University Anime Club. :DOh, O.K. <grumbles>

Non-anime mecha (eg., StarCraft's Goliath, SW's AT-AT, etc.) represent no problem to play balance. Gundams can not be used in balanced fashion if you follow canon; hence using them at the strength their proponents insist they have is incompatible with anybody using anything else unless the rest of us are masochistic enough to want to be victims. H_ll, we'd might as well permit the use of superheroes.And I can ignore them - or their non-existent RL equivalent - if I want to.I'm sorry, but you're not allowed to use the words "Lucas" and "sci-fi" in the same sentence. as for Asimov, he was never more than mediocre. If that's how you define science fiction, no wonder you like anime (shudder).

Lois McMaster Bujold (http://www.dendarii.com/), C.J. Cherryh (http://www.cherryh.com/), Ben Bova (http://www.benbova.com/), David Weber (http://www.davidweber.net/), Greg Bear (http://www.gregbear.com/), Frederick Pohl (http://www.frederikpohl.com/), and a host of others can write circles around your Japanese authors. Their work is real sci-fi; anime is swill.But strangely, not visible light - which, equally strangely, machines can not use. Thus quantum computers, optical fiber links, and lidar don't exist, while this bogus M-particle must be excepted by all because it makes your favorite weapon, the gundam, master of the battlefield. We all have to meekly agree to be pwned by you and your ilk, so that you can be happy as masters of the cheap adolescent-pulp anime universe that you think awaits all of us down the road (shudder).

Not on your life.

Here's my suggestion: we create a new RP category: anime. You want your silly gundams, go play there.

I think I have an idea! We all get acceptable(Battletech, AC, Goliaths, whatever), and we show him what THEY can do against his japanime shit. I guarantee there's not a gundam out there that can take on a Cauldron Born, Atlas, or anything similar. I dislike mechs foir RP, but gimme an AC with any parts I want, and even the incredibly wankish ZERO couldn't touch me.(made an AC that basically duplicated Wing ZERO, it sucked)

Many designs of battlemech Including the Annhilator, Orion, Ceasar, Battlemaster, Thor, Cauldron born, Gargoyle and Man O war. To name a few.

I just have to step in here for a moment. The Ceasar actually is quite respectable, having decent armor and weapons. In fact, its card in the Battletech TCG is actually good. Also, the CB would chew any Inner Sphere mech to pieces and blast the steaming pile of remains with a shower of missiles. The thing can mount more LRMs than a Vulture!

Which reminds me, I really need to design a ground version of the Pygmae (http://wiki.esusalliance.co.uk/index.php?title=PRA-TM-110_SCCAM_Module). I have infantry replacements, tanks, and APCs, but no fracking MLRS...

Now now. A lot of anime is good. It's just that shows like Gundam Wing give it a bad name. Yami no Matsuei, Elfen Lied and Gantz are quite good, along with several others such as Scrap Princess (I think. Only seen two episodes at my school's Pot Luck night :D), and FLCL. Please, don't let Gundam drag down the rest of the over-genre.

This message has been sponsored by the William Woods University Anime Club. :D

Hey, don't be dragging the Universal Century down with the rest of Gundam. SEED, Wing, and Turn A gave the Universal Century a bad name.

The only two good Gundam universes ever created were Future Century (G-Gundam) and the Universal Century (MSG, 8thMST, etc.), with the later of the two being THE best century category.

Honestly, the Universal Century is a lot more realistic with their MS.

Which reminds me, I really need to design a ground version of the Pygmae (http://wiki.esusalliance.co.uk/index.php?title=PRA-TM-110_SCCAM_Module). I have infantry replacements, tanks, and APCs, but no fracking MLRS...

I want one!:D That thing sounds badass!

You call Lucas a good sci-fi writer? Hell, he doesn't even write true sci fi! Most manga is drivel, especially Gundam and most other mecha series. Read Ian M Banks, Jerry Pournelle and Larry Niven, then we'll talk. Sci fi is alive and well outside of Japan.[Quote]

I want to kill you right now. Asimov is the god of robotic theory and sci-fi. I Robot was one of his creations that has now turned into a movie. Where is Big man Ray BB!? You forget the origins of modern sci-fi. I only put lucas in there cause everyone seems to think its the standard for FT.


[QUOTE]One wonders how sonar gets stuck in there, what with it being sound based and all...

FT is not all space.

One also might remember that Gundam isn't one of those animes, what with the silly designs and fighter-sized mecha taking out battleships with a single swipe of their light sabre.

Have you ever looked at how a Gundam works? Or how about the technology? I suggest you do before you knock it. Same as knocking a Star Destroyer cause it has 'superweapons' that are so powerful.

Non-anime mecha (eg., StarCraft's Goliath, SW's AT-AT, etc.) represent no problem to play balance. Gundams can not be used in balanced fashion if you follow canon; hence using them at the strength their proponents insist they have is incompatible with anybody using anything else unless the rest of us are masochistic enough to want to be victims. H_ll, we'd might as well permit the use of superheroes.And I can ignore them - or their non-existent RL equivalent - if I want to.I'm sorry, but you're not allowed to use the words "Lucas" and "sci-fi" in the same sentence. as for Asimov, he was never more than mediocre. If that's how you define science fiction, no wonder you like anime (shudder).

Lois McMaster Bujold (http://www.dendarii.com/), C.J. Cherryh (http://www.cherryh.com/), Ben Bova (http://www.benbova.com/), David Weber (http://www.davidweber.net/), Greg Bear (http://www.gregbear.com/), Frederick Pohl (http://www.frederikpohl.com/), and a host of others can write circles around your Japanese authors. Their work is real sci-fi; anime is swill.But strangely, not visible light - which, equally strangely, machines can not use. Thus quantum computers, optical fiber links, and lidar don't exist, while this bogus M-particle must be excepted by all because it makes your favorite weapon, the gundam, master of the battlefield. We all have to meekly agree to be pwned by you and your ilk, so that you can be happy as masters of the cheap adolescent-pulp anime universe that you think awaits all of us down the road (shudder).

Not on your life.

Here's my suggestion: we create a new RP category: anime. You want your silly gundams, go play there.


You are blatently thickheaded. You probably think all anime is childish, when infact some of it is probably too complex for you to even understand. Now Gundam may not be godly, but you have to put things in perspective if you want your arguement to hold water.

Mechs irl are not far off, combat ones are, and large 200ft to Eva's nearly 1000 ft models are not even possible. (Eva is organic and is just encased in armor and plating and is a slave (mostly...) to man).

Mechs (even SW and all that are mechanical are Mecha) are specifically used in english as man-powered machines that are high-tech and more commonly seat-able powered machinery. Most mech are actually technically cyborgs attachable to the person. If you recall Fuchikoma and Tachikoma which think on their own, but are capable of carrying people and being used themselves.

Eva uses the pilots mental and physical responses to mimic its own movements.

Gundam / Big O and the rest of the kid-friendly ones are usually just human powered.

As we get towards the space opera Crest of the Stars, we see mecha becoming a single entity with the user.

However you surely know that in the Gundam universe their developement was a simple thing because of the M-particle. Giving rise to the close-combat seen in Gundam. However your understanding of this is childish.

Its a particle... it spreads out... it has known properties. It can be used as a weapon and as a defensive mechanism. Though doing so will mean scattering it.... You can ignore it, but it would be like ignoring all FTL means for any tech or even laser based weapons for some. Its no worse then some FT armors that have no RL basis. However this DOES have RL basis. So up to you, but that's a major cop out.

Eraclea']Gundam / Big O and the rest of the kid-friendly ones are usually just human powered.

Heresy! Big O is the best anime ever made, and not for children. It is far too complex for a feeble mind to understand. The sheer scale of the series is mind-boggling!

I think I have an idea! We all get acceptable(Battletech, AC, Goliaths, whatever), and we show him what THEY can do against his japanime shit. I guarantee there's not a gundam out there that can take on a Cauldron Born, Atlas, or anything similar. I dislike mechs foir RP, but gimme an AC with any parts I want, and even the incredibly wankish ZERO couldn't touch me.(made an AC that basically duplicated Wing ZERO, it sucked)

Beat this:

Eva 01

If you want to be wanky.... this is it. Untouchable, unstoppable and capable of destroying the whole world... well its pilot did in the end. Even the best Western mechs couldn't even touch this thing at its full power.

Funnily done in this comic: http://www.reallifecomics.com/archive/010323.html

However we both know it was for kicks, and if it was serious it'd be a lot more brutal. (Namely Eva would squish it like it was an empty gallon of milk)

True wankyness of mechs is funny. The AT field prevents all methods of hitting or destroying it unless you have a Mech or an Angel (from GOD). With a S2 Engine (read: Perpetual engine that once took out all of Nevada's NERV and left a HUGE crater) that allows it to not require external power and gives it unlimited power (for as long as I could tell was possible). The EVA is the toughest Mech (well technically its a cyborg) you'll find in anime.

If you want I can maybe get a video of it. :D

Heresy! Big O is the best anime ever made, and not for children. It is far too complex for a feeble mind to understand. The sheer scale of the series is mind-boggling!

You fell for it.... though you got to admit 26 episodes. >.> Least Eva had fresh material and didn't resort to clip shows for act 13. Now go watch Eva before I post a gory video of what it is. :P

Eraclea']You are blatently thickheaded. You probably think all anime is childish, when infact some of it is probably too complex for you to even understand.<Tweeet>

"Two minute penalty for ad hominem attacks..."Eraclea']However you surely know that in the Gundam universe their developement was a simple thing because of the M-particle. Giving rise to the close-combat seen in Gundam. However your understanding of this is childish.

Its a particle... it spreads out... it has known properties. It can be used as a weapon and as a defensive mechanism. Though doing so will mean scattering it.... You can ignore it, but it would be like ignoring all FTL means for any tech or even laser based weapons for some. Its no worse then some FT armors that have no RL basis. However this DOES have RL basis. So up to you, but that's a major cop out.<Slams ... head ... against ... walll>

Let me repeat this:The Minovsky Particle

WARNING: The information contained in the following section is a plot element of a work of fiction and is not a real-world scientific theory.I think they had to put that warning in there because certain impressionable minds have a hard time distinguishing fictional artifice from reality.

Repeat after me: It doesn't exist. It has no RL basis no matter how hard you may claim that it does. It is solely a plot device to explain why people use gundams because without it gundams make no sense.

When you insist that I accept your imaginary particle as real, you effectively insist that I accept that gundams pwn all other weapon systems. That is offensive beyond all measure, because it's tantamount to saying that the gundam FT universe is the only possible FT universe - the godwank of all godwanks.Eraclea']You can ignore it, but it would be like ignoring all FTL means for any tech or even laser based weapons for some. Its no worse then some FT armors that have no RL basis.Some lasers and armor should be ignored because they are so wanky than they totally unbalance play.

As for FTL, there are scores of possible FTL systems that do not violate relativity or causality (e.g., the Alcubierre Warp Drive, Traversible Wormholes, the Krasnikov Tube, etc.). The more research I do, the more I am willing to accept the possibility of FTL travel. But a particle that is alternately either positive or negative, bonds in pairs to form a megaparticle, and magically makes computers and sensor systems fail? How much wankier can you get?

I repeat: If you want to play with gundams and expect that your foes will believe them to be the dominant weapon on the battlefield, you should go off and RP in your own separate universe and leave those of us who think that they are silly to engage in real sci-fi threads free of your godwanking.

<Tweeet>

"Two minute penalty for ad hominem attacks..."<Slams ... head ... against ... walll>

Let me repeat this:I think they had to put that warning in there because certain impressionable minds have a hard time distinguishing fictional artifice from reality.

Sure... its maybe there for morons, but the thing is that doesn't make it any different then your tech. Moot point.

Repeat after me: It doesn't exist. It has no RL basis no matter how hard you may claim that it does. It is solely a plot device to explain why people use gundams because without it gundams make no sense.

Uh ya... as I been saying from the beginning. Your point is:

When you insist that I accept your imaginary particle as real, you effectively insist that I accept that gundams pwn all other weapon systems. That is offensive beyond all measure, because it's tantamount to saying that the gundam FT universe is the only possible FT universe - the godwank of all godwanks.Some lasers and armor should be ignored because they are so wanky than they totally unbalance play.


Rofl. I just told you everything you needed to know about HOW and why it works genius. Fine.. let me tone it down so your feeble mind can get this.

I trust you know what Quarks are right how they form, what they do and all the different kinds? (Respond to this please, I need some common ground to explain it to you without it going straight over your head.)

As for FTL, there are scores of possible FTL systems that do not violate relativity or causality (e.g., the Alcubierre Warp Drive, Traversible Wormholes, the Krasnikov Tube, etc.). The more research I do, the more I am willing to accept the possibility of FTL travel. But a particle that is alternately either positive or negative, bonds in pairs to form a megaparticle, and magically makes computers and sensor systems fail? How much wankier can you get?

Its a lot better then 'zomg stargate' :)

I repeat: If you want to play with gundams and expect that your foes will believe them to be the dominant weapon on the battlefield, you should go off and RP in your own separate universe and leave those of us who think that they are silly to engage in real sci-fi threads free of your godwanking.

Gundams are superior to what I am making. Though they aren't really practical cause they are slow to anything in the FT realm. Even with substanial boosting they don't work well when a missile can take them out before they can counteract. If that was the superior tech, I wouldn't use them, cause they are lowbies stiil. Though do remember we haven't even gone outside the solar system here yet for Lotus (Eraclean homeworld) so things won't be powerful.

Eraclea']You fell for it.... though you got to admit 26 episodes. >.> Least Eva had fresh material and didn't resort to clip shows for act 13. Now go watch Eva before I post a gory video of what it is. :P

I've seen the whole of Eva, excepting the last episode and "The End of Evangelion." The Big O pwns Eva 01. Big O's got the shields, weapons, and armor to defeat anything.

Oh, and Evas are not 1,000 feet high. At least, not all the time. If you look closely, they change size.

Eraclea']Sure... its maybe there for morons, but the thing is that doesn't make it any different then your tech. Moot point.Tell me about my tech. Go ahead, feel free...

<pause>

You don't know what my tech is, do you? Other than the fact that I don't use gundams, that is...Eraclea']Its a lot better then 'zomg stargate' ;)Actually, a stargate could be built (see “Traversable Wormholes”*); you need exotic matter and negative energy, but many physicists believe that such things exist. The big problem with stargates is that you have to move the two ends to their final resting places by some other means, and that could be problematic. But stargates make one H_ll of a lot more sense than “M-particles”, truth be known.Eraclea']I trust you know what Quarks are right how they form, what they do and all the different kinds? (Respond to this please, I need some common ground to explain it to you without it going straight over your head.)Yes, I know what quarks are. Indulge me.Eraclea']Even with substanial boosting they don't work well when a missile can take them out before they can counteract. If that was the superior tech, I wouldn't use them, cause they are lowbies stiil.Bingo! And that's why you need to invent an M-particle: if you don't have one, missiles can take your mecha out at 5-10 light seconds the same way machine guns took out infantrymen charging enemy trenches with bayonets leveled in WWI. So – again – the “M-particle” is a plot device designed to permit gundams to pwn everything else.

*See http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hall/5803/tra.html and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wormhole.

I've seen the whole of Eva, excepting the last episode and "The End of Evangelion." The Big O pwns Eva 01. Big O's got the shields, weapons, and armor to defeat anything.

Oh, and Evas are not 1,000 feet high. At least, not all the time. If you look closely, they change size.

Some people say 1000, some say 600 ft. Though I guess the offical height is:

The official height of an Evangelion changes between 40 and 200 meters (130-650 feet). The Evas literally change in height from situation to situation. The animators make them however big they want them to be for dramatic effect, in some cases they climb up buildings, in others they easily step over them.

Either way it would surely wreck Big O, Big Fau and Big Duo. Probably all 3 at once to. :D

Remember... the EVA's can take nuclear warheads almost directly on them and survive, WITHOUT THE AT FIELD. The AT field makes all methods of non-eva/angel attacks null and void!

Btw... Big O was simple. Behemoth, Levithan and Ziz for Big O, Big Fau, and Big Duo respectively. The three beasts at the end of the world. With Lucifer (the fallen angel himself) making an appearance in the final ep with Angel.

Eva....was just wow. :)

I would have to disagree. There are many intricacies that you didn't discuss. The triune concept is the least of these. For example, what is Roger Smith? Who is Angel? Why is all the world a stage?

I know it's an unpopular view, but I still hold that Big O would take down 01. I mean, it's final stage is unstoppable.

BTW, that "Real Life" comic is hilarious!

Bingo! And that's why you need to invent an M-particle: if you don't have one, missiles can take your mecha out at 5-10 light seconds the same way machine guns took out infantrymen charging enemy trenches with bayonets leveled in WWI. So – again – the “M-particle” is a plot device designed to permit gundams to pwn everything else.

The obvious point remains the same. Why not just use these m particles or what have you on the far more efficient chassis of a fighter or tank?

Tell me about my tech. Go ahead, feel free...

<pause>

You don't know what my tech is, do you? Other than the fact that I don't use gundams, that is...Actually, a stargate could be built (see “Traversable Wormholes”*); you need exotic matter and negative energy, but many physicists believe that such things exist. The big problem with stargates is that you have to move the two ends to their final resting places by some other means, and that could be problematic. But stargates make one H_ll of a lot more sense than “M-particles”, truth be known.Yes, I know what quarks are. Indulge me.Bingo! And that's why you need to invent an M-particle: if you don't have one, missiles can take your mecha out at 5-10 light seconds the same way machine guns took out infantrymen charging enemy trenches with bayonets leveled in WWI. So – again – the “M-particle” is a plot device designed to permit gundams to pwn everything else.

*See http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hall/5803/tra.html and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wormhole.


Any FT tech that uses FTL or any other thing is theory. Just like the superstring theory and the M-theory and the model of the atom.

Well.. since you know what quarks are let's begin!

u up 0.004 +2/3
d down 0.008 -1/3
c charm 1.5 +2/3
s strange 0.15 -1/3
t top 176 +2/3
b bottom 4.7 -1/3

Those are the six quarks.

Well protons are made up of Up up down. While neutrons are Up down down. However what would happen you have a stable exotic creation? Up up up? You have a stable hydrogen with twice as much positive electrical charge and essentally 0 mass! It can repel electromagnetic forces.

That or you can use cold plasma, ionized charged electrons that have higher energy levels and push electromagnetic waves away.

I would have to disagree. There are many intricacies that you didn't discuss. The triune concept is the least of these. For example, what is Roger Smith? Who is Angel? Why is all the world a stage?

I know it's an unpopular view, but I still hold that Big O would take down 01. I mean, it's final stage is unstoppable.

BTW, that "Real Life" comic is hilarious!

Rofl.. sure.. AT field = no effect. Remember this survives a nuclear warhead hitting it.

The AT field was pierced, Big O's shield never was. And I would put money on the attacks of Hydra were pretty close to nuclear-yield. Anyway, this is not the place for this conversation. So, TG me if you want to continue.

The AT field was pierced, Big O's shield never was. And I would put money on the attacks of Hydra were pretty close to nuclear-yield.
The AT field was only pierced by the Lance of Longinus...

Well protons are made up of Up up down. While neutrons are Up down down. However what would happen you have a stable exotic creation? Up up up? You have a stable hydrogen with twice as much positive electrical charge and essentally 0 mass! It can repel electromagnetic forces.
Disregarding, of course, the fact that this form is quite obviously unstable... That and it would attract electromagnetic forces, due to its massive positive charge pulling in twice as many electrons. Assuming, of course, it stayed in existance for more than a few seconds, which is rather impossible.

The AT field was only pierced by the Lance of Longinus...

Ya. That's a lengendary spear that has impaled the lord. The son of god. Its a lance that pierces the barrier of the soul. That's why.

I want one!:D That thing sounds badass!
As a side note, those things ARE for sale. I believe the prices are on ESUSWiki in that article, and that there's a fighter carrying version as well. Paris drones, of course, so it retains the same basic launch mechanism and shape as the SCCAM variant. Just surf around on ESUSWiki, all of my designs are for sale, excepting the Super Dreadnoughts.

Eraclea']Rofl.. sure.. AT field = no effect. Remember this survives a nuclear warhead hitting it.

Except N-2 weapons did actually injure Angels, just not one-shot them. Injuring might not be killing them, but it isn't "No effect either"

Although there is a weapon that did one-shot an Angel, are you forgetting that big ass laser sniper cannon?

Disregarding, of course, the fact that this form is quite obviously unstable... That and it would attract electromagnetic forces, due to its massive positive charge pulling in twice as many electrons. Assuming, of course, it stayed in existance for more than a few seconds, which is rather impossible.


*sigh* How do you know its unstable? As long as the gluons hold it together it would work, and according to my info it would work. As long as you keep it in an electromagnetic field it will stay together until you release it. Then it would break down with entropy and you'll have a massive amount of positive matter that will break down with Tau to balance the equation, and Tau is heavier then electrons (by 3000x) and this stronger force will allow for said electronic jamming as they are excited and repel the electromagnetic field (for their own is stronger) and will eventually degrade into protons, neutrons and electrons. Essentially reverting to hydrogen when released after the energy holding them in that ionized exotic state is released. Which requires a fair amount of time (Gundam used 29 days, but more rl estimates that small amounts of it will last for a second or two as these particles are unstable and will degrade into neutrino's and their respective anti-particles).




The tau-minus is a electron-like particle with a mass of 1.784 GeV/c2. Its antiparticle, the tau-plus, has the same mass but a positive electric charge. These particles were discovered at SLAC in experiments at SPEAR . The 1995 Nobel Prize was awarded for this discovery.

This third type of charged lepton is also unstable. The tau-minus decays to produce its matching neutrino and a virtual W-minus boson. The W-minus has enough energy that there are several possible ways for it to decay, such as:

1. An electron and an electron-type antineutrino.
2. A um-minus and an muon- type antineutrino.
3. A down quarkGlossary Term and an up-type antiquark.
4. An s quark and an up-type antiquark.

The quark and antiquark do not emerge individually. One or more mesons emerge from the decay that contain the initial quark and antiquark, and possible additional quark-antiquark pairs produced from the energy in the strong force field between them.

For tau-plus, a similar set of decays occurs -- just replace every particle by its antiparticle (and vice-versa, every antiparticle by the matching particle.) Thus, for example, tau-plus can decay to give a tau type anti-neutrino and a positron and an electron-type neutrino.

t1theory.gif (1444 bytes)
Neutrinos (Electron Neutrino, Muon Neutrino,Tau Neutrino)

There are three types of neutrinos, one associated with each type of charged lepton. All are particles that are somewhat like electrons: they have half a quantum unit of spin angular momentum, and do not participate in strong interactions.

However, neutrinos differ from electrons in that they have zero electric charge and, as far as we know today, zero mass. (See, however, evidence for neutrino mass discovered in Japan.) Experimentally, all we can do is set an upper limit on their masses -- they are smaller than some value. Larger masses would have had observable effects in some experiment. The limits are:

* electron neutrino less than 0.00000002 GeV/c2 for electron type neutrinos (or antineutrinos).
* muon neutrino less than 0.0003 GeV/c2for muon type neutrinos (or antineutrinos).
* tau neutrino less than 0.04 GeV/c2for tau type neutrinos (or antineutrinos).

The only known difference between the three neutrino types is which type of the charged lepton they are associated with during production or decay processes.

Since neutrinos have no electric charge, they participate only in weak interaction or gravitational processes. For this reason, they are very difficult to detect. We observe them only by the effects they have on other particles with which they interact.

For example, a high-energy electron-type neutrino can convert to an electron by exchanging a W-boson with a neutron (which becomes a proton when it absorbs the W boson). This rarely happens. With an intense source of neutrinos and a large detectorGlossary Term containing many neutrons, one can observe eventsGlossary Term with no visible initiating particles that can only be explained as neutrino-initiated processes. What is seen in the detector is the recoiling electron and proton after the process occurs. (Experimental work demonstrating this process resulted in Frederick Reines sharing the 1995 Nobel Prize with Martin Perl.)

Even harder to see is the process where the neutrino is deflected by exchanging a Z-boson with a proton or neutron. The proton or neutron gains energy from this exchange, so one searches for events where a recoiling proton or neutron is seen with no associated electron and no visible initiating particle.

In high-energy particle experiments, we often use energy and momentum conservation to infer that production of one or more neutrinos occurred. If the detector detects everything but neutrinos, then an event where the total final energy detected (or the total final momentum) does not match the initial energy (or momentum) in the incoming particles, then neutrinos must have been produced. The neutrinos carried off the missing energy (and momentum).

Eraclea']Any FT tech that uses FTL or any other thing is theory. Just like the superstring theory and the M-theory and the model of the atom.I hope you're not putting the inventions of Japanese fantasy writers and their fans on an equal footing with physicists publishing serious papers. Unfortunately, I think you are.Eraclea']However what would happen you have a stable exotic creation? Up up up? You have a stable hydrogen with twice as much positive electrical charge and essentally 0 mass! It can repel electromagnetic forces.Except, of course, that Δ++ Baryons (http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/particles/delta.html) aren't stable; they last about 0.00000000000000000000001 seconds before decaying into a proton and a charged pion. So where does that get you? Why, nowhere.

As for “repelling electromagnetic forces”, there is nothing in the literature to suggest that a matrix of such particles would block or repel, say, a neutral particle beam or long-wave radiation (such as radio waves).Eraclea']That or you can use cold plasma, ionized charged electrons that have higher energy levels and push electromagnetic waves away.Cold plasmas show more promise, but can hardly be expected to render all radio communications, radar detection systems, microwave communications, or computer and remote control systems obsolete. The best that can be expected from cold plasmas is for them to provide a shield of some kind. Big deal: so shields exist. They aren't impervious to everything by melee weapons, I'm sure they can be detected by various sensor systems, and they won't affect computers, communications, or control systems. As for lasers and particle beams, cold plasma won't stop these things dead: if will just attenuate them.

IOW, with cold plasma, you have the same thing everybody else has: a rudimentary anti-laser shield.

I'll give you credit for the effort, but you're far short of what you need to have something like the “M-particle”.

Except N-2 weapons did actually injure Angels, just not one-shot them. Injuring might not be killing them, but it isn't "No effect either"

Although there is a weapon that did one-shot an Angel, are you forgetting that big ass laser sniper cannon?

You must be refering to Sachiel. The 3rd Angel. One of the weakest to. Sachiel did not have its AT field deployed and it took a direct it, but if you recall it had learned what the attack was and it would not be as effect next time.

It took a nuclear-strength blast and survived without its AT field. Also its safe to say that the standard N2 mine used against Sachiel was 40-50 KT Non-nuclear (hell clean radioactive is more like it) that did that damage. However, the effect was clear. It worked.

Why wouldn't it work again? The Angels were EXPECTING THEM. If I shoot bullets and missiles at you and you don't even take damage from them what happens when you drop a 40-50 KT weapon on me? Not expecting that.. but then it was for every time AFTER that.

Most notably when coming across a Sea of Dirac (most powerful of all shields and weapon systems) putting the remaining 992 ( N2 mines into it would not ensure a kill.

Ritsuko proposes that the UN drop all 992 remaining N2 mines while the remaining EVA's activate their AT fields, creating an effect strong enough to destroy the Angel (and most of 01). Misato objects to Ritsuko saying "the pilot's life is irrelevant" and that retrieving Unit 01, even if it is damaged, is the priority.

If that barrage will NOT destroy the Eva we can tell that they are clearly not going down aside from another AT field piercing.

Our next chance to see how much they have become immune to these is when Rei runs with a N2 mine in hand and it has no noticible effect on either the Eva or the Angel. (Episode 19)

An extreme use of the N2 mines is the one used on Nerv itself. Megatons in power it wrecks havoc on Nerv, and although the EVAs are protected their is no damage to them.

Asuka is also defeated after entering limited combat mode (no AT fields) and the other Angels AT fields are not seen. (Most likely as they were all Lance of Longinus's created artifically) This also means that the only destruction of a EVA to date takes that power and effectively even the Lance of Longinus was not enough to kill the EVAs. They ATE EVA 02 and ripped it apart, killing Asuka in the process.

Also it should be noted that when an S2 engine goes critical (as it did in Nevada it wiped out EVERYTHING with in 89 km effectively a 2 gigaton nuclear explosion.

Eraclea']*sigh* How do you know its unstable?See the web page I've cited.Eraclea']As long as you keep it in an electromagnetic field it will stay together until you release it.I thought you said these things killed electromagnetic fields?Eraclea']Then it would break down with entropy and you'll have a massive amount of positive matter that will break down with Tau to balance the equation, and Tau is heavier then electrons (by 3000x) and this stronger force will allow for said electronic jamming as they are excited and repel the electromagnetic field (for their own is stronger) and will eventually degrade into protons, neutrons and electrons.You're making this stuff up, aren't you?

First, you seem to be confusing electromagnetic waves with electricity. You realize that radio waves are not electrical emissions, right? They're just photons of a longer wavelength than visible light; ditto for microwaves. Charge doesn't matter when it comes to EM emissions - just charged particles.

And - as I said above - decay is into protons and positively charged pions, not neutrons and electrons.

As for tauons (http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/particles/lepton.html#c4) (or tau-minus particles), I have no idea where you bring those into this equation, but they only last about 0.00000000000003 seconds. Not much better than delta baryons.

I still don't see where your "M-particle" is coming from.

I hope you're not putting the inventions of Japanese fantasy writers and their fans on an equal footing with physicists publishing serious papers. Unfortunately, I think you are.Except, of course, that Δ++ Baryons (http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/particles/delta.html) aren't stable; they last about 0.00000000000000000000001 seconds before decaying into a proton and a charged pion. So where does that get you? Why, nowhere.

As for “repelling electromagnetic forces”, there is nothing in the literature to suggest that a matrix of such particles would block or repel, say, a neutral particle beam or long-wave radiation (such as radio waves).Cold plasmas show more promise, but can hardly be expected to render all radio communications, radar detection systems, microwave communications, or computer and remote control systems obsolete. The best that can be expected from cold plasmas is for them to provide a shield of some kind. Big deal: so shields exist. They aren't impervious to everything by melee weapons, I'm sure they can be detected by various sensor systems, and they won't affect computers, communications, or control systems. As for lasers and particle beams, cold plasma won't stop these things dead: if will just attenuate them.

IOW, with cold plasma, you have the same thing everybody else has: a rudimentary anti-laser shield.

I'll give you credit for the effort, but you're far short of what you need to have something like the “M-particle”.

Even in a field they don't last, but unless you are going with a fifth force it won't happen apart of a stable forth generation lepton with unusual properties. I.e A graviton of sorts which is about as likely as capturing a Higgs Boson.

So we're still looking at an invented particle.

Look, I've got nothing against creativity in FT RP (although I prefer to stay as close to hard science as possible). The problem is that for gundams to work, you've got to tell your enemies that their lasers, particle beams, missiles, missile control systems, and computers no longer work because of your magical "M-particle", all in order to permit you to close with the enemy and/or force everybody in the engagement to use handheld weapons. In my book, that's a major godmod: you're telling me what my weapons (can't) do.

I feel the same way about FTL inhibitors, BTW. Fundamentally, such systems come down to somebody else telling me how my FTL systems work; again, this is a serious RP violation. Unless you're prepared to explain to me why my stuff no longer works in terms of my own physical explanations/technobabble, you don't have any right to say, "Sorry, your computers are all fried; sorry, your sensors are now blind; sorry, your particle beams no longer work; sorry, your warp drives have shut down." Excuse me? The rules or the road are that I alone have the right to say what happens to my stuff, not anybody else.

Ergo, if I don't want to recognize M-particles as working on my equipment in order to avoid having to have units I despise (gundams) serve as the core of my military, I have that right.

Again, I believe that gundam lovers would be better served if they were to explicitly set their threads in universes where the M-particle exists (ditto for FTLI users); by extension, if you want to bring this stuff into someone else's thread, it's up to the thread owner to authorize you doing so.

Not to get off topic, but FTLi came around in order to prevent drive-by ortillery raids that generally ruin RPs. I hate them myself but I see the necessity in trying to keep the RP alive, and just on a practical and fair level you should know and have a chance to intercept incoming war fleets with whatever local resistence you can muster.

Alright, I couldn't stay away. Not when people are deriding the good names of some of the quality mecha out there (but I admit some bad ones do exist).

1.) Variable geometry wings do NOT shift mass or weight, but center of gravity.

2.) C-Frac and C (ie, Lasers, Masers, et cetera) weapons are not 100% accurate. Ever hear of a guy named Einstein and about a little thing called Relativity (the original one and not the one he later came up with)? A little thing called time dilation (if you insist on using RL physics) make them avoidable against an agile target that can get out of the way.

3.) FT = science FICTION. So you can drop all that bull crap about stuff not being applicable in the NS FT universe BECAUSE ITS NOT FROM RL!

4.) There are fighters that are built on what amounts to a swing arm attached to the cockpit. Remember the B-Wing, for example.

5.) Mecha as space combat units are limited. IMHO, ground combat mecha supported by other ground combat forces are where they come into their prime.

6.) Anything, if RPed correctly, can account for a great RP. Thus, while my ground combat mecha are amoung my heaviest units, they can still be damaged and/or destroyed by non-mecha enemy forces if done correctly.

7.) SD.net's God-wanked fanboy bull crap is just that, crap. True Lucas-canon is stuff from places like StarWars.com. Now, unless you can provide real Lucas-canon, and not SD.net God-wanked bull crap, with numbers that are Lucas-canon, then shut your trap.

8.) When are you freaking retards going to get it through your thick, Neanderthal skulls that SIZE DOES NOT MATTER! Just because a fighter isn't as large as, say, a heavy cruiser, that doesn't mean, using the right technology, it couldn't have the same, or more than, power than the larger ship.

9.) My space construction mecha ARE dedicated construction platforms.

10.) Take my Slipfighters if you want a good example of a balanced long-range fighter. Able to operate independently and use FTL travel. The ineffiecent SW fighters (and pretty much other SW ships) are poor examples, TBH, at long-range fighters. The only good thing SW tech has going for it is that its got one of the fastest FTL drives available.

11.) Heresy! Big O is the best anime ever made, and not for children. It is far too complex for a feeble mind to understand. The sheer scale of the series is mind-boggling!

Agreed. Big O was a great anime (I like so many and I'm not really one to decide on absolute favorites) that had great depth and left people thinking and wondering at the end.

@Eraclea: If you think Big O was just about the mecha, then you're wrong. The story played a much bigger role in Big O. Unlike Evangalion which were 99% about the mecha.

Er, SeaQuest, they have kinda proved beyond a reasonable doubt that size does matter, and like it or not the SD.net figures are accurate. Also time dialation does not make soemthing slwoer or less accurate... I am kinda befuddled as to where you got that idea from.

Joranhor']Er, SeaQuest, they have kinda proved beyond a reasonable doubt that size does matter, and like it or not the SD.net figures are accurate. Also time dialation does not make soemthing slwoer or less accurate... I am kinda befuddled as to where you got that idea from.
If size does matter, then explain how a fit-in-one-hand ZPM is far more powerful than a Fusion reactor 10,000 times the size? Need I go on?

Also, relativity dictates that the closer you get to the speed of light, the slower you go in relation to slower objects (ie, they can dodge you easier). Its a built-in RL physics based counter.

Big O is still a children's story initally. It follows NGE on so many backgrounds. Even so much as taking religious aspects to the Mechs. Eva is too complex for many people. It was made so complex by so many people. Right down to the names and placement and the movement across the Sephiroth.

I could bring you hundreds of sources, documents, examples, textual evidence and other information about it.

Eva was about the true nature of man as much as Big O was about the philosophy of mankind's desire to find existance, meaning, and understanding of himself when he has no memories or past.

If size does matter, then explain how a fit-in-one-hand ZPM is far more powerful than a Fusion reactor 10,000 times the size? Need I go on?

Also, relativity dictates that the closer you get to the speed of light, the slower you go in relation to slower objects (ie, they can dodge you easier). Its a built-in RL physics based counter.

No. Its you appear slower to a target moving with you at a slower speed (behind or infront) then a stationary target. If you ran on a straight line a person going 2 mph and a person going light speed were to pass each other, who would appear 'slower' in relativity? No one. Its only if an object is relative to you and not a point.

The funny thing is that as you go light speed in a situation everything around you slows down to nothing, a standstill as a set frame in time. If you go faster then this you would see time rewinding as you go farther out. Hard to visualize, but if you shot a laser on a straight line for 10 seconds every 10 seconds for a minute and instantly hit 2x light speed you'd see nothing for 10 seconds, then 10 seconds of laser, then 10 seconds of nothing..etc until you had witnessed the 'rewinding'.

Now if you went light speed, you'd see nothing. As you have never caught up to the light that had been sent out from the laser.

By using this, you can essentially make lasers take a long time or essentially little time from hitting you by going different speeds and dodge accordingly. Also this means you would technically have light coming at them at 2x light speed if you and another ship are on a collison course.

This means that you will never see the laser beam, nor the computers or any other detection system that relies on sensing light-speed attacks at technically FTL speed in relativity to you. So you and your enemy would never see it coming!

8.) When are you freaking retards going to get it through your thick, Neanderthal skulls that SIZE DOES NOT MATTER! Just because a fighter isn't as large as, say, a heavy cruiser, that doesn't mean, using the right technology, it couldn't have the same, or more than, power than the larger ship.


Sadly enough, size does matter. Have you never conducted an experiment before, SQ? Let me explain how you'd go about doing something around 8th-grade level, to give you an idea of how wrong you are.

You determine what you're trying to discover. In this case, it'd be that size doesn't affect the power of the ship.

So, we're trying to prove that s (size) does not effect p (power). Our other two variables are design and technology. (d and t).

Do you understand the notion of independent and dependent variables? Essentially, an independent variable is something that can stand on its own - ie, is not modified by other variables. Size would be one of these. Dependent variables, however, are ones that are effected by the other variables.

Now, let's assume, for the sake of simplicity, that s*t=p

In other words, size times technology equals the power of the ship. Now, if we're trying to prove that size does not matter, we can't conduct a proper experiment without keeping some variables constant - ie, if we're trying to prove a relationship between size and power, we wouldn't change the value of technology - that wouldn't accurately represent the relationship between size and power.

Now, let's continue on this mathematical trend. Let's assume a fighter equals one, a gunship equals two, etc, etc. You can't constantly change technology (as you've done), and continue to state that size doesn't matter. The only way to honestly tell whether size matters or not is to keep both the technology and design variables constant.

So, we're trying to prove that a fighter is equal to a gunship. Assume all other variables equal one, for the sake of simplicity.


s*t=p

Fighter: 1*1=1
Gunship: 2*1=2
Frigate: 3*1=3

Now, since I didn't know the equation at first (or didn't know it precisely), I can now theorise it. Since the tech variable has stayed constant, I can use these variables to extrapolate the correct equation for a ship's power.

From this, we can assume that, given equally good design and technology, a ship of double the size will have double the power - such a ship will have more room for reactors, armor, thrusters, etc.

If size does matter, then explain how a fit-in-one-hand ZPM is far more powerful than a Fusion reactor 10,000 times the size? Need I go on?

I'd just like to restate that that's a horrible fallacy. Let me use a analogy to illustrate my point.

Let's say I'm trying to prove the relationship between velocity and distance travelled for a certain period of time in a car.

For the car equation, we can say average velocity * time = distance. Pretty simple, right? V*t = d

So, if the car's going 45 km an hour, for an hour, we can surmise it's done 45 kilometres. However, if you change both the V and the t - you can't prove anything. If the next experiment has the car going 60 km for four hours, you've changed too many variables, and you can't get any useful data out of it - for what you're trying to prove, in any case.

Do you see now? I've been trying not to yell at you, but please don't come into these arguments and make statements that my eight-year old brother could refute, as it doesn't add anything to them.

FT = science FICTION. So you can drop all that bull crap about stuff not being applicable in the NS FT universe BECAUSE ITS NOT FROM RL!Science Fiction != Fantasy.

I hear this all the time: “It's science fiction, so I can do anything I want”. As if there's no difference between sci-fi and fantasy, no difference between Willow and 2001: A Space Odyssey. Perhaps not, but there is such a thing as truth in advertising. If FT wankers are going to insist that anthing goes in FT, then those of us who want something more realistic are going to need to invent a new RP category to keep things on an even keel.

Yes, I'm talking divorce here: it's not fair for those who think sci-fi is no different from swords and sorcery to presume that everyone else shares their tastes, and that they are therefore entitled to force their style of play on unwilling players.Joranhor']Also time dialation does not make soemthing slwoer or less accurate... I am kinda befuddled as to where you got that idea from.Time dilation will affect the reaction speed of the relativistic platform, but if the latter is either a dumb projectile or a remotely piloted weapon, then it's a wash. It's only if the relativistic platform is the decision-maker that time dilation has any impact.Also, relativity dictates that the closer you get to the speed of light, the slower you go in relation to slower objects (ie, they can dodge you easier). Its a built-in RL physics based counter.You've got it wrong, SeaQuest. The relativistic platform's internal clock runs slower, but its velocity remains the same. The effect is that a decision maker aboard a relativistic platform takes longer to make decisions than one aboard a slower-moving platform.

Let's suppose that a homing missile traveling at .99c flies at a stationary target. The computer aboard the missile is working at a fuzz over 14% of the speed of a similar computer on the target platform; thus a decision by said computer that might take .1s while at rest takes .7s when the same computer is moving at .99c. The result is that the relativistic computer is reacting far slower than would otherwise be the case, but the missile itself isn't moving any slower.

This suggests that a slower-moving platform could use relativity to “dodge” a faster-moving one, by making a series of rapid maneuver changes at the last minute in order to force the slow-thinking guidance computer on the incoming warhead to do the same. Unfortunately, there's a great big fly in that ointment: the quarry isn't going to see the attack coming much before it falls.

Consider an inbound projectile hurtling in at .99c – 297,000 km/s. During the last AU of flight (8m 25s), the onboard computer's clock will show an elapsed time of 1m 11s, giving the target 7m 14s longer to “think” aboard the encounter. Unfortunately for the target, the image of the projectile will reach the victim just 5 (or so) seconds ahead of the projectile itself; at that point, the separation between the two will be only 1.5M km. Sure, the assailant will only have about .7s to respond to whatever evasive maneuvers the target elects to indulge in, but the target will only have 5.05s to decide what action it wants to take.

I'll still give odds to the attacker under the circumstances.

Also that is assuming that the target is STATIONARY. As we all know it is not that simple. If something is traveling at .99c towards the missile this is where it gets stupid.

Say they were 1 AU apart and instantly appeared at .99c (just for the control).

Now using his measurement of 149,598,000 kilometers = AU

and 299,792.458 km / s it would take 499 seconds to cross one AU. 8 mins 20 seconds.

Now to the center is 4 mins 20 seconds at light speed.

Traveling at .99 light speed is equal to 296,794.53342 km/s would be 8 mins 28 seconds. Divided in half, for 4 mins 14 seconds.

That gives just six seconds to see the incoming object from 1 AU!

Well if your sensors are light speed it would take 8 mins 20 seconds to identify the object from one AU on its appearance. Essentally making all of FT combat a fire freely situation at those speeds, with little chance of any dumb weaponry able to destroy an incoming object. Also smart weaponry would have just six seconds to find, track and predict the location of the object at that speed, as it would have had 8 mins 20 seconds of flight and you will see all that movement in just 6 seconds, which will exceed the maximum ability for smart weapons without using FTL communications to have ANY chance of hitting a ship.