How can mecha even compete?
>>137561293
>Implying a tank can beat this
They can't
>>137561617
Behold.
>>137561293
>two barrels
for what purpose
>>137561617
>>137561721
>>137561755
Double the dakka
But they can. Just not the usual nip mechshit.
>>137561293
Aesthetically, that's about it.
Mechs could be a thing, but just not in that scale. An exoskeleton of some sorts would be more practical.
no fighting
>>137561865
ClanTech is too OP. Gonna have to dial it back to something more like Raiden.
Most people saying tanks could beat mechs are just armchair generals who don't understand the importance of high ground
Is /tg/ and /m/ actually `the same board?
>>137561596
>>>>/mu/
>not >>>/m/
shit nigger wah are you doing?
>>137561596
>>137561964
Which is why tanks are obsolete and modern wars are always fought with mechs.
>>137561975
To a degree. /m/ focuses more on gundams while /tg/ goes more for Battletech
>>137561964
>>137562008
I think we'll rather use drones but yeah.
>>137561923
Gundam's mechas should not try to be practical.
>>137561923
>worst of both
Holy shit that's not even funny.
>>137561865
I always thought mechs are mostly used by mercenary/paramilitary units as highly mobile strike force for their versatility (though imo 4 or 6 legs are better) while planetary government forces etc use fuckhuge tanks.
>>137562086
Using extremely large tanks is kind of counterproductive and really results in more weight and maintenance for negligible gain.
Super robot > android maid > Gundams > battletech > tanks
>>137561721
>a weapon to surpass metal gear
It's all shait as long as the enemyhas a decent airforce.
But can mech drift?
>>137562241
That's not how a tank rotates.
>>137562241
>Crusaders
Holy fuck my dick. That was by far the sexiest looking tank of WWII IMO.
>>137561964
A high profile is not something you want for any sort of field artillery.
Not to mention the innate impracticality of something having legs.
Putting all the weight of something heavily armoured on two thin legs is utterly retarded because it would be way too fragile. Especially if you're going to use it as a firing platform.
But even if you would be able to solve these problems somehow, you'd only end up not being able to pass any complicated terrain because all your weight is distributed on a tiny surface area. The ground would give in and you'd get stuck or fall over.
how would a tank fare against an opponent that outnumbered them 10,000:1 on the battlefield.
You don't actually think a tank could hold the line, without the support of MECHAnized infantry
>>137562599
Muv Luv a shit
>>137562086
there is a reason why that is scrapped. you know what actually will work from gundam? dropping outerspace colony and beam funnels.maybe
>>137562599
Are we talking real scenarios or are we using anime physics and nonexistant materials?
>>137562599
Jesus Christ how many times do we have to go through this.
Yes, tanks are more practical than mechs realistically speaking but it's fucking fiction so anything goes, which means mechs are usually portrayed as superior because more mobility, made of indestructium or whatever, close and long range, etc.
Also pic related.
>>137561293
tanks are useless in space sempai. Step up your game while my mecha blasts your 1 dimensional toy from orbit.
Its almost as if you want the space kaiju to win the GALACTIC war
>tanks vs tanks battles
>mechs vs mechs battles
>tanks vs mechs battles
Are you living in the 20th century? No other vehicle will enter the battlefield until somebody has won the air battle and the entirety of the enemy army has been melted under heavy missile fire. Then you can send your infantry and a bunch of support vehicles to take control of whatever you were fighting for.
how can mecha even compete?
>>137562899
Biped vehicles in space?
For what purpose? You can have a functional plane without useless extremities for a fraction of the cost.
Or both if you are live in the Macross universe and decide a transforming vehicle gives you a tactical advantage for some reason.
>>137562704
we're talking augmenting an infantryman, with a power suit 3-5m in size
Tank will always carry bigger gun and more ammo then the mech
Tank will always be more reliable
Tank will always be more mobile(face it,if your mech flies its just shittier plane)
Tank will always have superior armor
Tank will always be cheaper
Tanks just superior
>>137561293
Not this thread again
>>137563015
ALL terrain baby. Land, Air, Sea, and Space
>>137563054
>(face it,if your mech flies its just shittier plane)
Not to mention, if you have the technology to make flying mechs there's no reason you can't use the same tech to make an awesome flying/hovering tank.
>>137563015
Ease of movement.
The Jet would also have to be filled with thrusters up the arse since there's no air, which means flaps are useless.
How can the laws of physics even compare?
>Thinly veiled mecha thread
gj, OP.
>>137563151
Which one do you think that flies better, a brick with wings or a bird?
>>137562241
Who the fuck's driving that? Hermann Bix?
>>137561293
> tanks looking this cute and slicing a moon in half at the same time
tchh
>>137563267
I thought it was Jupiter.
>>137563192
ive never herd of a tank that united all sentient life in the universe
>>137563300
was one of its moons if i recall
>>137563015
The macross transformation allows for easy turning, or at least thats what I want to believe.
>>137563300
I thought in Gunbuster they weaponized Jupiter by encasing it and reducing its size to make it a giant bomb
>>137561865
>he says while posting a ripoff of nip designs
>>137563187
Explain how legs propel you through empty space.
>>137563300
>>137563379
Both wrong. It's Titan a moon of Saturn.
>>137563569
>change center of mass by moving around
>use thrusters
Pretty simple, really
>>137563569
You kick the vacuum away of course.
>>137563187
Because it is much more practical to fill up the entire solar system with conveniently placed platforms and rocks to jump off of.
>>137563633
So thrusters are too hard but thrusters AND legs are somehow better?
>>137563569
> doesnt know how to stick a landing in space
how the fuck else are you gonna cross your arms and pose let alone uzumaki kick the fuck out of something?
>>137563670
No, but it is easier to have members so you are capable of turning without having to rely on thrusters.
Although the debris does help as well.
>>137563223
Nah, it's fine, just make it go really fast.
>>137563753
I did say ease of movement.
Also, how well would a plane do in an asteroid belt?
>>137564017
That's a jet, not a tank.
>>137564126
Density of most asteroid belts is low enough to be irrelevant.
Tanks require teamwork, mech kid wouldn't understand.
>>137563785
This guy gets it!
>There will never be an anime about intelligent tanks (built by ancient humans) who safeguard technologically regressed humans on colony planets
Pic related
>>137564216
?
>>137562168
Super robot > android maid > double barrel front+rear track fancy impractical tanks > western "realistic military" mechs (battletech, warhammer) > tanks > nip "realistic military" mechs (Gundams etc)
>>137562267
Actually, modern "racing" (reduced armor) tanks do drift.
>>137563785
Reminder that Gunbuster physics are based on irl "ether field" theory that is literally about dense fluid-like vacuum.
>>137563569
Main engines in "legs" may possibly provide better reactivity with neural linked pilot. Downside - it requires thrusters activity to maintain "body" position when "legs" move.
Anyway having pilots do maneuvering means either low-tech or full retard setting, tasks like that should be done by low-AI with pilot/captain giving abstract orders such as attack priorities.
>>137561923
I really wish we got something like the guntank back but with a current design.
>>137564126
You realize asteroids in the belt or any asteroid field are hundreds of miles apart at their densest point, right? If you charted a random straight line through a field you might not even see a single asteroid. Even if you did you'd have ample time to go around it.
>>137564423
Does this count?
>>137564408
I've said this many times: in space there's zero advantage to having a bipedal frame. Works great when there's gravity, sure, but in space there's zero advantage. The ideal frame would be a perfect sphere, something with infinite symmetry that can be easily controlled from any orientation since all orientations are identical from all approaches.
>>137564566
>Works great when there's gravity
it doesnt if were talking about combat. Humans would be beasts in modern warfare if they were much shorter meaning they would have better cover against fire etc
Classic.
>>137564346
And thank fuck for that
>>137561293
According to GDI, better than a tank, though not as good as a badass tank.You need badass mechs for those.
>>137564423
Closest you'll ever get
>>137561596
/mu/cha
But which one is cooler?Anyvody who answers tanks is a contrarian.
>>137564856
>a Metal Gear is made just a few years later
Way too drive the point moot.
>>137564540
Not really. I mean with a mech upper body, something like >>137565161 or how armored core approaches the design.
>>137565442
>thatsthejoke.jpg
>>137565360
>cooler
Pz IV-sama, m8
>>137565442
>too
to*
Reminder tanks and mechs are both shit tier
The future belongs to the armored car.
>>137565449
That in some context could be pretty practical, at least the arm things.
Would make changing weapons for different kinds of missions on the field a breeze. Also weapons that aren't made for one single vehicle.
>>137561865
All the good Battletech designs are ripped straight from anime.
>>137563267
That's retarded. That moon is in one piece due to gravity. Slicing it in half wouldn't change that. It would MAYBE cause an [strike]earth[/strike]moonquake.
>a mecha that pilots a tank
Does this exist?
>>137563633
Dude. Please. Stop.
You can't change your center of mass by moving around. Physics don't work like that.
>>137566177
>>137563753
http://gundam.wikia.com/wiki/Active_Mass_Balance_Auto-Control
>>137564566
No, an ideal shape would be a cigar.
You would aim to show the minimal profile to the enemy, while allowing your own weapons to target.
>>137566277
>gundam
Stop reading there.
The answer is obvious.
>>137562599
That what literally artillery is for
>>137566277
"and is not a substitute for propulsion"
You can move your body around your center of mass, but the CoM stays still.
You didn't even understand the article you linked, so I have no chance of edifying you.
The incorrect assumption in these arguments is that tanks and mecha would fulfill the same battlefield roles. A humanoid mech would provide superior performance in urban or otherwise cover-heavy environments due to superior ability to fire around corners with arm-mounted weaponry, the potential of vertical movement, and superior horizontal agility. Legs also give advantages in rough terrain, and a humanoid shape allows for passage of smaller spaces than a rigid box shape. If you just want artillery, a tank is obviously more sensible, but there are plenty of roles currently filled by infantry that mechs can perform better in.
I think the Japanese obsession with mechs is rooted in their obsession with Samurai and martial arts. A bunch of planes and tanks shooting at one another looks nothing like two Samurai fighting.
why not both.bmp
>>137567193
Now see, that's just taking the worst of both worlds
Athiests just got checkmated
>>137567193
They don't even have a built in radio which is like the most important thing
>>137563785
>>137561293
>Gundam tank versus Patlabor labor
Why? I mean, the one on the right isn't even a military vehicle.
