What is the better weapon of war?
In what game can I destroy mechs with tanks?
Pic related, mech (Titan) killer.
>give it the same armor the mecha use and guns
>mfw people think mechs somehow have far better armour and weapons than tanks
>people think that while mechs were being developed tank designe would've stagnated
Well its a tendency that mecha always get the new rare super metal armor and the prototype weapons and are driven by angsty teenagers, while tanks are cannon fodder driven by old men.
Where as if you applied that to the tanks, you could build more of them and have even more ansty teenagers driving them.
a single projectile would destroy so much of a swarm that it would be a waste to produce them really.
That's what I find funny.
If there was some breakthrough into some new armour or weapon that's in it's own level then that would be distributed, if not instantly then eventually.
Mechs might have a tech advantage, but it wouldn't last.
>development that is so far ahead of it's predecessors being made
>it works perfectly first time
>it's never mass produced or used for anything other than mechs
Just doesn't make sense. Reasons like that are why I don't watch the genre. Also fuck angsty teens.
What he said... Except when the completed mech is of a scale, capable of dominating all known weapons. If someone managed to make a gurren lagann, you would need a big bang to potentially destroy it.
What about tank with anime magic physics
Also oranges and apples. Tanks would be faster, mechs would be all terrain. Tanks would be better in conventional war, and mechs would be better at blowing up towelheads.
Mechs a shit. They literally get taken out by glass bottles and rocks.
>Mechs are absolutely shit tier in terms of design and practicality.
If I had to compliment them, they're very versatile. Would be good for special operations or supporting roles. Maybe precision strike units?
Either way, on earth they would have very little advantages.
In space it's probably debatable but in that circumstance the design of the mech may as well just be a spaceship really since it offers none of the advantages or disadvantages of earth, so moving limbs are pointless.
>What do you think the Guncannon is?
I don't know.
Sounds like someone trying to bait /k/
how about a mech with the ability to transform into tank, that sacrifice maneuverability in exchange with firepower and defense?
Drones have the flaw that they're vulnerable to too many means of electronic countermeasure. The only reason we haven't seen many real-life examples yet is because the only countries actually using any unmanned combat vehicle technology are allies, and using them to bomb mudhuts in the orient.
That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard.
Also it already exists
MechWarrior: Living Legends has mechs and tanks. For the same price, tanks provide better armor and more focused firepower, but lack the mobility of mechs.
You'll be hard pressed to find active servers though - PGI killed off the project with licensing bullshit to make room for the trainwreck that is MechWarrior: Online
>I don't know.
In Gundam, the RX-78 was a prototype that got mass produced.
Mass produced versions of the super machines are not uncommon either. Last year, there was Argevollen where the main reason they let the mech go into battle was to get data. The people who were repairing it constantly complained about the lack of parts and their inexperience. The mass produced models ended up being better as well.
Super robots also have mass produced models. TTGL has the Grapperl.
Mechs. See: Mobile Suit Gundam, episode < 10.
The tanks are armored bastards with 360 turret rotation and 60 degree tilt and fucking hover.
Granted, the RX-78-2 was after them so they'd lose regardless.
Fucking everything in the military is vulnerable to electronic countermeasure these days. That's just the nature of modern combat. You're not gonna find a perfect weapon with no limitations. Not in a modern military anyway.
>not things that fly
Even Muv Luv knew that controling air space means controling the battlefield
Talking the sci-fi shit we see in anime and a world where machines don't break down on a daily basis.
If you're talking a mech as in a lone man piloting a giant robot, then it's just an over designed and inferior tank.
If you add the ability to jump or fly, along with the ability to carry a load of soldiers, then the mech starts to gain a niche between close air support and armor with massive mobility. There's a slight use to the hands thing as it means one mech can utilize a downed mech's weapon. The hands thing actually can become an advantage in that it would allow mechs to easily swap out weapons on the fly or to pick up a platform from another downed mech.
Realistically though, mechs would be horribly complex machines which constantly break down. Unless some magic solution comes along, they would prove too unreliable to use.
The ideal route would be to master exosuits and work up your way up. Likely, we would find an upper limit before hitting diminishing returns. Space might open things up more, but you wouldn't really be using tanks up there.
By the way, you may want to check out Argevollen. In that series, tanks and mecha are about on the same level, with tanks starting out with a slight advantage due to their height, while the mecha get better due to vastly superior mobility.
People always say mechs wouldn't work with real physics but some would.
What people seem to forget is the worlds these mechs are on might have lower gravity and air pressure. Sometimes the mechs are in space. In that context sure they'd work just about as well as any fighter plane people throw into space in all sorts of sci-fi.
>is the worlds these mechs are on might have lower gravity and air pressure
You really think that's the issue?
Do you know how hard it is to create a robot that can even walk properly, let alone a battle capable completely dexterous armoured fucker with onboard power.
It would be impossible to power the movements, even if they were possible, which they wouldn't be.
But im space you would gain more by building space fighters with big weapons which mean you have more weapons flying around rather than one mech with one arsenal being a large target. With the same materials you could build 5 fighters.
Variable Fighters are objectively the best weapon systems ever, superior to all other mechs, as well as tanks and aircraft. Prove me wrong.
A mech fighting in space is just as stupid as a fighter plane in space. Also who said mechs need to be oversized? You could easily make 1 mech with the same materials as a fighter.
You really think that's an issue? Super computers with self teaching software, bam solved half your issues right there. Power is again not really an issue, we're already talking sci-fi nonsense, just say they have a tiny nuclear engine. You think people actually care about these details?
>Top of the line weaponry in setting
>Can take on three other mecha at once
A platoon can be controlled by one man
Granted, Argevollen has no planes.
Not really. Most military hardware only uses computers for communication and instruments, which they can function independently of. You;re not going to hack a manned aircraf out of the sky, the best you can do is scramble some of its navigation instruments, at which point it's more than capable of being flown manually.
If you do the same to a drone aircraft, it loses its eyes and ears and ceases to function as a combat vehicle.
People talk about sci-fi combat nanomachines and nanite swarms like it will someday be a viable technology, but for any machine miniaturized to the extent where it's small enough to not be an easy target for standard weapons, its electronics would be so small and vulnerable, that even a change in the passive electric charge in the air would be destructive.
>bam solved half your issues right there
No you didn't though. I'm talking about the actual implementation and powering of the facilities that move the limbs and shit.
>tiny nuclear engine
thats a lot of fucking resources for one fucking vehicle
>same materials as a fighter
once again, the largest issue of the mech is that it's entire body needs to move. Planes don't need that.
>Granted, Argevollen has no planes.
That's gonna be a problem, because Variable Fighters are planes. Planes that turn into mechanoid robots, as well as walking tanks.
They also have a surprisingly good reason to exist (taking place in a universe where humanity fights against, and eventually lives alongside, a race of gigantic humanoids).
Anon, swapping weapons between vehicles is not something that planes and tanks normally do on the battlefield.
If you're talking flying, it's also not normal for helicopters to be able to land on a greater than 10 degree slope. Legs would allow for those landings along with a much greater degree of staying power which is a major drawback for air power.
These aren't trying to do two things. This is filling a niche.
If we are talking about mecha and the standard idea of a mecha, then they are big. If you are talking smaller, you are getting in to exosuits.
I didnt say fighter planes, I said space fighters. Did you even watch Star Wars?
>Argevollen has no planes.
Easily the worst part of the show. You'll be watching this mecha show that wants you to take it seriously with its mind-reading future-mechs, and yet every single military scenario presented would be totally rekt by a handful airplanes. Or hell, even some long range artillery. IRL we had the tech for airplanes before tanks, and yet in a world of mecha more advanced than anything IRL, there's still not even dirigibles. What a stupid show.
>You could easily make 1 mech with the same materials as a fighter.
It's a matter of overcomplicated articulation compared to vernier thrusters on pylons like the Starfury from Babylon 5.
The point is that interchangeability is pointless when you have specific units that fill the rolls themselves. It's called combined arms.
The vehicles don't need to swap weapons because for every tank that controls the ground, there is a plane controlling the sky.
Variable Fighters are pretty awesome and are one of my favorite type of mechs. It's just that the Argevollen-series in universe is something that lots of mecha shows don't cover, being unmanned warfare.
To be fair the eyecatches showed a lot of different designs for Trailkriegers, some amphibious and some appearing to be aerial based. It is likely that planes and aerial combat do exist in this world, but were out of focus.
>Or hell, even some long range artillery
But that kept on happening. Hell, that was the plot of an episode
Powered armor makes more sense than gundam-style mecha.
>A mech has the capability of walking over terrain that a tank can't.
There is a very small amount of land a tank can't traverse, and even there the mech would be fucked up by air assets.
>implying that even matters in combat
>implying that if they can shoot they cant be shot at
That doesn't mean that the Bernouli principle which generates lift based on pressure differences would magically stop working.
It might fuck up navigation and electronics, but this breaks the suspension of disbelief
Yeah Star Wars is an example of fighters in space. It's just as stupid as mechs. There is no reason they should be shaped like terrestrial fighters. With all the turrets and thrust facing forward.
What you want is something that is designed to fight three dimensionally in Zero-G.
Additionally you could have something roughly 2.5m - 5m in height that would be larger than what you'd call an exosuit that a pilot could be seated in that would use far less materials than a fighter.
True but a mech also doesn't need to have sustained flight either.
>a mech also doesn't need to have sustained flight either.
A mech is using power whether it's in flight or not so it would have to return to base just like a plane.
In terms of loiter time a plane can just fly in cirlces anyway.
A plane would be called out under specific circumstances so it wouldn't need to land in combat zones, that's what helicopters are for (not that different vehicles for different jobs advantage again).
A pointless discussion.
We might as well discuss "Dragons VS. Crocodiles, which is more lethal?" - one is fictional and in most cases imagined to be one of the worst and most powerfull monster in the world. The other is just a crocodile.
Any points, like "Tanks would be faster, Mecha can climb" are moot, because I simply write "the mecha can fly with a speed of Mach 12".
The battlesuits in "A Farewell to Weapons" are a great example of what 'practical' mechanized infantry would be like.
Essentially the armor and firepower of a tank with the size, adaptability and maneuverability of infantry
wars are won by logistics, so it comes down to which is cheaper to maintain and run.
in other words, the tank
that is of course assuming they both use human pilots
the real weapon of war these days are silent stealth 360 no scope get nerfed to follow geneva convention drones.
Mechs are inherently flawed. Under no circumstances does a weapon ever need to be bipedal and have human-like limbs. It just makes it needlessly more complex and gives it some significant balance problems.
Unless we're talking four-legged designs or spider-like legs. Those would actually be useful for traversing rough terrain but even then, we already have helicopters which makes this shit completely redundant. Humanoid mechs are just full retard, though.
>mfw can't do kung-fu with tank
>They're really slow and maneuver like shit.
>confirmed for not knowing about tanks
>cites urban combat as an example
>mfw can't do kung-fu in a mech cause I just got blown up by a tank
>hands instead of just built-in weapons
I can understand hands, being able to grab stuff seems like a good idea, but I hate the idea of making giant guns for them to hold.
Why waste the resources for mass-producing giant guns when you can just build them on?
>Cites sandniggers fighting in urban combat as an example
In other words, the absolute worst possible example he could pick, because sandniggers cannot into armoured warfare and combined arms.
>Its good planning
Well, it is in the SW universe, because it works like it does.
But in another piece of fiction you could, i.e. say that Star Wars type space fighters are decent in space and atmosphere,but inferior to anything designed for space (a spherical ship with guns and thrust in every direction for example) or atmosphere (a fighterplane). They might be good option for certain operations, like blitzattacking a planet. You could call them aerospace fighters.
You really don't want a atmospheric fighter in space it's like arguing for subs that can also crawl across the land. In space you'd want something designed for space combat, Zero-G Vacuum is very different than fighting in atmosphere. Like a Pod from 2001 with 360 turrets.
Kinda. Still larger than a power suit and has a seated pilot, I'd call that a mech.
The role isn't to replace aircraft, it'd have it niche like everything else.
That's what wacky Japan mechs are suppose to be because carving out a role in combined arms and following characters who are just another cog in a larger war machine doesn't gel with them.
It would depend on your resources. Do you have the money to make fighters just for space that can never touch ground? You could be limiting your self if you tried to specialize to much when a simple change of shape can make it great for both. Then you can build 10,000 that fight in space and air, rather than 5000 of each. Next time a fight breaks out on a planet, you have 10,000 fighters ready to go rather than 5000 and visa-verse.
Showing off. Would you fight against a country that can build a ten meter tall humanoid weapon that is inferior to everything they could build for the same money?
Everybody can buy a T-72 on the black market, now a mecha is just showing how many ressources you have and that you don't care if such a thing will be lost
what inevitable will be the case
I'm pretty sure SW already does that.
The biggest spacecraft, built to always stay in space as a base of operations, have all kind of turrets everywhere. Star Destroyers have 360 degree firepower. So does the Death Star, but the planet destroying gun is so massive and takes so much power, they can only build one.
In Muv Luv they mass produce TSF and they are capable of going Super Sonic and have stealth (They are based off of Jets)
They would absolutely destroy any and all tank divisions.
In conventional warfare airborne forces would still be extremely relevant. Even in places like Afghanistan airborne was a major player because of the terrain. Small end mechs would be ideal for the role over the only other option which is the German Weasel.
Why do you think Mechs need to be an end all jack of all trades super machine that can do everything? Who ever seriously said that and believes that other than little kids and the Japanese?
Depends, how big is the mech?
Nope. TSF's are dumb as shit. As stated so many times before, you could just take that same technology that makes them great and apply it to tanks and attack helicopters. TSF's quite literally have no advantage over either tanks or helicopters.
well maybe the issue is the face that actual large scale tank on tank hasn't occurred since ww2 in which there were almost no cameras on the front let alone in combat.
Hence why you have supersonic jets to kill them
well mechs are generally humanoid, I assumed we were discussing those.
I was actually thinking of that while writing it believe me or not
>Who ever seriously said that and believes that other than little kids and the Japanese?
Just a friendly reminder that you're browsing /a/ and therefore we are all discussing anime mechs, which is why people are calling the concept retarded in the first place. I do not think they're jack-of-all-trades; that is precisely what they ARE, the ultimate warfare weapon in every mecha anime ever.
How effective would insectoid mechs be in comparison to humanoid mechs?
Is the human form really something we should shoot for it mechs are made?
The only cases where mechas aren't dumb as shit are where they literally powered by magic and can't be replaced, like Ideon and Eva. Even stuff like Minovsky particles can't justify humanoid designs.
Except that the F-35 is turning out be exactly what was promised, sometimes even better, and will have a lower unit cost than the inferior Eurocanards while being more advanced in just about every way.
Sprey and Pray, pls go
Tanks can't go supersonic.
Tanks don't have arms.
Treads don't work on every single type of terrain.
Helicopters cannot fight on the ground, which is necessary when laser class beta are in the area. You need to quickly move from the ground to the air.
Enjoy your dead humanity.
First, TSF were designed to fight aliens, not jets.
Second, a super sonic jet has no advance capability over a TSF when given stealth or even without stealth. The only thing that matters is the quality of the missile you shoot.
You cannot name a single thing a jet can do a tsf cant in air combat, but I can name things it can do like instantly transition into a strike helicopter.
>It's better than Eurotrash so it's a good plane.
When your incredibly expensive plane doesn't completely out-dogfight planes a gen behind nor outcarry them, it's an expensive piece of shit.
When was a tank piloted by a god?
>You cannot name a single thing a jet can do a tsf cant in air combat
vastly outnumber them with the same amount of resources?
You yourself admitted that the format of firing a missile doesn't matter so why have one super expensive thing to shoot them when you can have hundreds of little flying bastards that can do it.
>implying there has ever been a modern generation tank fight
>implying that you know what would happen if there was
>Tanks can't go supersonic.
And yet something as non-aerodynamic as a 20 meters tall human statue can. By all means if they have the technology to make mechas super sonic then planes should be able to reach the speed of light.
Sounds like VTOL would be perfect for the job
The really, really short version is that it fucks over all kinds of long-range communication, wrecks missiles and other guided munitions, and creates beam weapons that are stupidly effective against armor, making CQC the name of the game, and mobile suits the new standard.
damage a single leg and it's good as dead
that said, the recoil on pretty much anything worth mounting on a vehicle would beat the shit out of the joints, so even if it was used quite sparingly it would break down very quickly.
something like a tachikoma is a semi-viable design because it still has wheels for travel, but would still require far more maintenance than a regular vehicle, but less than a large model like the walking tank that goes on a rampage early in the series, but even if it took no damage in combat, so is not truly viable as a replacement, but could still be used as a rescue bot in radioactive areas, but would be too heavy for things like burning buildings.
walkers are niche use only, but those niches are why people get into robotics.
>vastly outnumber them with the same amount of resources
It cost 150 million dollars for a f22 raptor, jet version. There are less than 200 of them.
It cost roughly what it cost to make a tank to make a tsf.
You are full of shit and don't know what you are talking about.
>choosing between a mech or a plane
why not both in one?
>What is the gulf war
>What is the iraq war
>What is the Syrian Civil War
>What are the wars between Isreal and it's neighbors
>What are literally all the conflicts going on around the world being fought with Russian and American tanks
You are really delusional.
But that's wrong. It kinematically outperforms the latest F-16 in an A2A configuration.
Between VLO and its integrated sensor-targetting-datalink suite, it position itself for better shots than it's non-VLO counterparts.
In it's strike configuration, it carries more than a Super Hornet further.
>Didn't the Gulf War have a lot of them?
>shitty old soviet tanks vs western tanks that can shoot them from vastly further ranges
Nope. There was no need for the western tanks to manoeuvre because they couldn't even be targeted.
>It's fucking stupid because beams in Gundam are still insanely long range
It's still within visual range though, that's the point. You can no longer hit something from a continent away.
Mecha wins hands down, best tech path.
Oh yeah, the shit we have does REAL good against this thing.
Not that you'd ever want to risk destroying it.
Hug the ground. You've never play 2142 aren't you?
It's literally invincible to anything that isn't one of the other mechs.
Just as well, if it's taken out the universe goes with it, since it's part of a "game" to weed out parallel universes by tying said universe's lifeforce to a mech. And then killing whoever pilots it to power it after the fight is over.
We're talking about the future. Such a technological advancement so as to make it possible is plausible.
Whether it would be worthwhile is the debate ITT.
Literally what I've been saying.
They can carry smaller munitions that have retarded amounts of firepower but relatively low range usually, they can't use guided munitions so well, and they have to be able to fight CQC when enemy mobile suits come in range.
And also you have to consider that the Europeans are buying them specifically for the VLO configuration so they can create carriers without having huge airstrips, so there goes the carrying capacity.
>We're talking about the future
You are an idiot. Mechs will never be possible. A robot would be able to walk, then it would destroy itself. Muscular systems generate heat and the heat would erode absolutely any system you use strong and flexible enough to be used as a musculature system.
You 4chan idiots amaze me. You call me an idiot for "magic science" then completely ignore reality in your following post. Educate yourself.
>If it's knocked down, it's more like a turtle.
Considering it has a laser that can target every lifeform on a planet simultaneously, getting knocked down isn't exactly a game ender.
or when it shot the enemy who was hiding in Hawaii with a single giant blast. From Tokyo.
Which model are you talking about?
If referring to the B, while it does sacrifice fuel and load compared to the A and C, it is vastly superior in every manner to the Harrier and Harrier II it would replace.
Bokurano is literally the madoka magica of mech anime, just a decade older. Also no happy ending, it ends with a "fuck you, it started sad and it's going to end sad" ending.
And I mean it really is Madoka
>15 kids, all around 13-14ish, are tricked into signing a contract
>they're told it's a fun game and they got to pilot a robot and save the world against another robot
>first kid beats his enemy, he mysteriously dies when celebrating
>so does the second, except in the pilot seat
>the small white creature who oversees it all tells them that piloting Zearth takes your lifeforce in exchange for using it
>you can't avoid it, you're going to die, unless someone else signs the contract to die in your place
>if you lose, earth and the universe ceases to exist
>if you don't win your fight in 48 hours, you automatically lose
I'm talking dogfighting ability similar to most actual interceptor craft, like the F15C, and naval planes with good carrying capacity, like the F/A 18E.
No shit it's got better carrying capacity than the small, subsonic harrier, but is not a good replacement for specifically-built planes. The Europeans just put up with it because it's the "best" VTOL aircraft they can put in their smaller carriers.
>Mechs will never be possible
Gekkos are pretty damn feasible, power source notwithstanding.
This webm exemplifies something I really hate about mecha combat. Normal tanks and combat vehicles might as well be made of paper coated with thermite while the mechas have armor that can repel a nuclear explosion. Even though they should be made form the same material.
The directly comparable -A and -C F-35s are superior in those respective roles.
Don't count the -B out of the fight entirely. It still has the excellent aerodynamic form of the plane, it still has very good maneuverability, and it still has both the stealth and integrated sensor package to rape most previous gen fighters.
A issues of procurement and defense policy do not denigrate the qualities of the F-35 as a fighting platform
Hey, it can move 70 tons of tank.
The big issue with limbed mechs is balance, and the guys at Boston Dynamics have built several robots that can balance themselves pretty effectively, including one bipedal robot.
It's been 18 years since a good solid Xenogears like game. Give them their day.
Also, Mechs would never work unless we get the tech to make them semi-cyborgs about 12-21 ft. tall. That tech is not avail for at least another 150 years.
Not when considering price. They're good planes, but completely overpriced and inefficient in those areas. The stealth capabilities of the plane are also only so-so, especially when compared to other stealth fighters.
In fairness, the reason Votoms can afford paper armor is because it's a war between 2 giant empires spanning an entire galaxy and every battle has millions, if not billions in casualties.
>but completely overpriced
Not him, but speaking as someone who served in the USAF, they wouldn't be if Lockheed and other companies didn't purpose overprice everything, right down to charging 10x the normal value for just rivets.
Heat is not a solvent, it does not corrode things.
Heat is not a magical energy that cannot be dealt with, air cooling, radiators, and circulating liquid coolant all exist for the express purpose of keeping machinery from overheating.
For someone who comes off as so well learned, you don't seem to know very much about how actual machines work, do you?
Hover tanks shit all over mecha unless some bullshit magical plot device is involved.
And where would all that gas be stored? The issue isn't "Can enough power be had?", but "Can enough power be had within the Gekko's volume?"
We'd need batteries more efficient than what we currently have (C2 and Al batteries are coming along), or nuclear reactors more compact than what we currently have (Lockeed displayed an experimental "pickup-size" fusion reactor late last year).
It's cheaper than the Eurofighter even at LRIP prices. The Rafale costs just over $100 million per plane. Once orders start to be placed, the F-35A is, for example, expected to go down to $85 million. The Gripen is the only one that is significantly cheaper, at $70 million, but is much less capable. Even that $70 million doesn't tell everything. South Africa was pissed that it was significantly more expensive to operate than they were told.
You are wrong.
>stealth only so-so compared to other stealth fighters
What, the F-22? Probably. Anything else, speculation. However, the T-50 and Chinese planes are probably inferior due to various design choices such as inlet design and canards.
my power armor shits on tanks and mechs
>carries a nuke for the shoulder launcher
>bugs cant do shit to that armor
>rifle rounds can punch through the thickest material
My mech carries 2 fucking nukes, one on each arm.
It works on water and produces oxygen by the way, it's fucking ecological as shit.
It's also super fast and has eagle eyes
Yeah, but what happens if you have to shit? I best your suit doesn't have a built in toilet. It wouldn't fucking fit. I bet you have to shit your pants.
Check GunMetal vidya
Also thread related
tank + mecha
This is one thing that mecha definitely have over tanks, that being mobility.
Generally tanks need roads to travel at their top speed, although I can imagine that a mecha in real life would suffer greatly from one of the issues with heavy armored vehicles, which is sinking into soft ground.
Since their weight will not be distributed across tracks, but focused into two points, being their feet.
It has a gun that frosts my shit into pure energy and shoot it to the enemy, it can kill anything in the universe with one shoot.
Oh yeah, but mine has fast reflex that dodge bullets.
The problem is mechs have been built up too much.
No matter how much you argue tanks are better, it doesn't change that we have mechs that are galaxy destroyers and do the shit like it episode 5 of Gunbuster. It just becomes a nonissue, because unlike tanks, mechs have been turned into superheroes in machine form.
Much less than mecha.
Fucking Strike Witches make more sense than mecha. There is absolutely no reason to use large humanoid robots for combat. At all.
I agree, it really depends on what Mech or Mechlike you pit against a tank. If the mech is even semirealistic, then there are definite pro's and con's on each side, but if its something that can fly, has nigh undefeatable armor, and shoots a billion lasers from every part of its body, then obviously the tank would lose.
Humanoid robots made for battle are even more bullshit. Especially the flying ones.
At least witches have magic and shit all over physics.
Mecha trash tries to be serious and presents mechas as a viable war machine. That's just complete bullshit.
The only way to answer this is by asking what can hold more cute girls.
>Why would you ever give it a humanoid form? It serves no purpose.
it's psychological, it brings back the idea of man-to-man combat.
If you make the machines humanoid, then by proxy it becomes two humans fighting.
Why would you need other weapons? If you don't waste so much space for useless limbs or head you can take bigger weapons and more ammo.
So what for? Close combat weapons? Please. Nobody use that shit anymore and for good reasons.
>all these people who want mechs to be realistic
>they don't want their mechs powered by COURAGE
You people have lost your childlike sense of wonder
Quantity is a quality of it`s own.
Where you can build one mech and train operator for it, you can easily mass battalion of tanks against it,divide the troops and outflank all strategic defense points.
Cons being that they stick up a lot more, unlike a tank which is (at least these days) somewhat flat, and benefits greatly from sloping armor.
Limbs are also a two edged sword, yes legs and arms give you more ability to manipulate and move, but are more susceptible to being amputated, and can't be as heavily protected as the skirted tracks of a tank unless you're willing to sacrifice mobility and flexibility for heavier armor (which also increases strain on whatever system powers the whole thing, and increases cost of fielding the weapons system).
>Lol laser class that melt everyone
You do realize that helicopters can just fly under the minimum altitude of laser-class just like the TSF's do, except since a helicopter has a smaller profile they also have much more room to maneuver.
>Lol fort and fortress class.
Not even an argument mate, those fuck up everything equally.
>Tanks can't go supersonic
Neither can mechs, unless they have some fancy-ass super jetpack... Like TSF's do. If you put the jetpack on a tank it can supersonic.
>Tanks don't have arms.
You can give them arms, which will still make them cheaper/easier to produce than a mech.
>Treads don't work on every single type of terrain.
Neither do legs with fuckhuge ground pressure. Once again though, you can get around this mobility issue by making your tanks into hovertanks or giving them a jetpack.
>Helicopters cannot fight on the ground, which is necessary when laser class beta are in the area. You need to quickly move from the ground to the air.
They can operate below the laserclass min. altitude far easier than any TSF can because of their smaller profile.
>Enjoy your dead humanity
Humanity wouldn't be nearly as fucked as they are in Muv-Luv if they didn't put all their resources into making stupid and cost-ineffective TSF's.
The only feasible Mech on Mech combat would be if all nations agreed not to fight conventional wars and instead settled all their disputes with 1v1 giant robot fights.
This would be an ideal world.
Last time mechafags were convinced that humanoid shaped mechas were obviously better for space combat that anything else since they could "travel around freely and point everywhere, not like spaceships".
Depends what type of warfare we'll be fighting then.
Both gundam and star wars use strategies and tactics straight from ww1 and musket based battles, and real world tanks follow modern maneuver warfare. yet both are fairly useless in space, the next step for war, where point defense, speed, and missile targeting are the future.
likely we'll see mid sized ships circling each other in wide sweeps shooting missiles, then retreating to take out the enemies' launched missiles, then circle back to do it over until one is hit.
Mecha can have reactive boosters mounted on the back for instant acceleration. In case of getting stuck or for accelerating to top speed.
Or for generating momentum for devastating mawashi geri.
This shit is utterly pointless in real war. It looks cool on screen. But in reality it's a retarded concept.
For the price of one mecha you would have a formation of like 10 tanks, 5 attack helicopters and 3 fighters that could do all the mech could but much better.
Doesn't matter mech or tank, when it gets hit, it takes the same amount of time to take that shit out and replace it. Any mention of "easy to maintain" on either side is complete ignorance of mechanical maintenance.
There you have it folks; the mech genre deconstructed in 4 pages.
Consider the powerplant of a tank like the Abrams.
Its a completely self-contained system that can be easily and quickly replaced because instead of multiple systems all connected to different things, its every part of the engine in a single unit.
It makes maintenance much easier to preform, or in the case of a complete failure, makes replacement easy.
There are people than thinks giant robots aren't just a big practice target for ATGM/JDAM
> it takes the same amount of time to take that shit out and replace it.
No it is not, you have just proved you complete ignorance of mechanical maintenance.
If you're going to build a mech, just fucking go all out. Destroy all pretense of realism so no one can bitch.
Make it become stronger with the pilot's willpower
Give it a transformation that exists purely to sell a new model kit
Make the only people who can pilot it hotblooded teenagers that love to scream attack names
Just fucking go for it.
Look at this shit.
Shell traps fucking everywhere. Weak spots fucking everywhere. A giant target.
And it's armed with one 120mm gun with very few rounds and 36mm gun.
That's just pathetic.
Not even mentioning all the expensive shit inside to make it move, you could use all this metal to make at least 10 tanks with 10 120mm guns each one with 10 times more ammo.
Mecha are just fantasy bullshit.
>Mecha are just fantasy bullshit.
Exactly, so why not go full hog and make them the stuff of fantasy?
Why are you limiting yourself to reality? All the OP said was tank vs mech, and last I checked there's no tank equivalent of ttgl.
The only way mechs are could be practical in war is in a construction/logistics role, and as mobile AT/ART/AA in a spidertank format. So basically, only by serving in a support role can mechs see practical use.
Sexia is the best, truest 00 waifu
The problem is if the setting is full fantasy or some super advanced technology there is absolutely no point to make a mecha either.
You can make super advanced tanks and hover craft.
Humanoid body makes no sense. It's there only to look cool and make fights seem more person vs person.
Arm missiles a shit, but missiles could be launched from an arm-mounted pod.
Shrink the Mecha in size, a bipedal system can still work to produce a machine large enough for a human to ride inside.
The section of the body which contains the cockpit is separate from the section of the body that holds the legs by a neck-like structure.
Gyroscopes will feed constant information to this structure which will compensate for the swaying motion produced by walking, as well as keeping the Mech balanced while it maneuvers.
Both helicopters and jets have relatively compact propulsion systems that could allow a mecha to if not fly short distances, than at the very least jump or boost itself from one location to another.
nigga I was already talking about gits tanks in this thread
there is no possible way to keep the joints moving buttery smooth like that, friction and weight are the two biggest arguments against large walkers
that said, spidertanks are still far more viable than bipeds like gundams, in that they could function realistically, but they just wouldn't be good
You see now, tanks and Jets are pretty straight forward - movable canons.
While mecha is fortified human form with limitless applications.
Heck, can use huge rocks to throw at targets if out of ammo, and that's just one example.
The cost debate, while fuck all who use it as an excuse, since there's an oiled industry ready to fart out tanks like no tomorrow.
If mecha would be mass produced the cost would be manageable.
Tanks are an insanely old concept. Chariots were basically ancient tanks.
Mecha would be useful in construction works. Exo-skeletons could have some military uses.
But large humanoid robots? Pure fantasy.
>there is absolutely no point to make a mecha either.
Maybe because the people making the show like mechs
>It's there only to look cool and make fights seem more person vs person.
Exactly. What's your point?
I just wish I had the picture from Da-Garn that was basically
>why is there's a lion head on the chest?
>because it looks cool
Of course, double doubles.
How could you not love a tank?
Mechs are better.
Mechas are super old concept. Stilts are basically ancient mechas.
Please, something so large and heavy would require insanely strong joints.
You would need insanely complicated systems to make it move and keep balance, and when something fails you are left with a pile of scrap metal that can't move.
Making something so heavy and lacking any aerodynamic qualities try to fly is as retarded as flying elephants.
Even before we had technology for subs there is an obvious use case for them. I imagine any historic naval commander would love to have ships that can sail underwater.
Mechas are like having submarines and saying fuck that let's make enormous mechanical fish and fight each other with them.
When they were first made they were too slow, got stuck and took a LOT of fuel. It wasn't until Patton started using them with infantry late into ww1 did the tank have hope of getting effort put into them. until then the trench was everyone's niche.
>The concept of an underwater boat has roots deep in antiquity. Although there are images of men using hollow sticks to breathe underwater for hunting at the temples at Thebes, the first known military use occurred during the siege of Syracuse (about 413 BC), where divers were used to clear obstructions according to the History of the Peloponnesian War. At the siege of Tyre in 332 BC divers were again used by Alexander the Great, according to Aristotle. Later legends from Alexandria, Egypt, in the 12th century AD suggested that he had used a primitive submersible for reconnaissance missions. This seems to have been a form of diving bell, and was depicted in a 16th-century Islamic painting.
>Although there were various plans for submersibles or submarines made during the Middle Ages, the Englishman William Bourne designed one of the first workable prototype submarine in 1578.
Being able to get a superconductor to float over a very strong magnet does not make a hover tank. You'd also need those superconductors to be room temperature superconductors which is currently still magic sci-fi wankery.
So, why are people so butt hurt over idea of having mech irl one day?
>Strong robotic joints
Its more likely than you think.
>Movement and balance
Check out the robots created by Boston Dynamics.
>When something fails you are left with a pile of scrap that can't move
Just like every other machine that uses moving parts.
>Making heavy shit fly
This helicopter can lift not only its own weight but nearly sixty metric tons of cargo.
I take your sci-fi tech used to make a mech and make a tank out of it instead.
Bolo anime adaptation when.
how many tank anime have this literal motherfucker?
Wait wait wait, if I take a humaoid form, and just multiply everything by 10 it gets fucked?
I mean, I can understand current humans having a size limit given bone structure and whatnot, but you're telling me there's no feasible way to up things up?
>I fucked your sister!
>Well that upsets me a bit because you're an asshole, but she's a grown woman and it's her decision who she sleeps with.
>and your mother
>FUCK YOU ASSHOLE
>OH GOD HELP ME, SOMEONE HELP ME, HELP ME-AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH-
Weight imposes certain constraint on structural shapes.
Elephants per example are much larger, heavier, and taller than humans, their legs are like pillars to support that weight, a limb that was more slender wouldn't support that kind of weight, it would snap under the stress.
To size things up, you change your materials, stronger, lighter materials mean you can build bigger and less bulky structures, because they reduce the effects of weight constraint.
We're limited by things like pressure and tensile strength of materials. The largest machines we have have to move REALLY slowly in order not to break.
See pic related, has to be built like a suspension bridge.
Before anyone asks, that's not realistic in any sense, that's the point. Nagano is a petty, bitter old man who doesn't want his mechs to EVER have models because he doesn't want anyone to have them but him, so he makes them like glass figurines so that model kits are impossible.
He also lost his shit when SRW accidentally put one of them in a game thinking it was from L-Gaim, on the grounds that "I don't want my beautiful machines fighting and being destroyed by those brutes!"
counter this three points that do not deal with bipedal mecha being impossible
1. they are larger targets than tanks of equal size
2. they carry smaller canons/guns than tanks of equal size and less ammo
3. engineering 101 the more complex a machine is the more likely it is to breakdown
Are you legitimately retarded?
Nothing of that makes mecha plausible.
Comparing tiny industrial robots with giant mecha is just idiotic. Mecha joints would need to be 50 times more durable. Especially if shit is supposed to run and jump.
Yes, some helicopters can lift huge cargo. But they fly like bricks. Combat helicopters need to be fast and agile.
And no, it's not like every other machine at all. Tanks are 50 times simpler in comparison to mecha. When something breaks in a tank usually it can be fixed fast.
Mecha would have 300 times more moving parts that could break and and 100 times more advanced avionics than normal war machines.
The larger size thing is a bad argument. A humanoid machine much like a human can crouch or go prone to massive reduce it's profile. Complexity and cost are better reasons but I wouldn't say they're necessarily prohibitive if you don't go full retard and have 5 story robots.
Guys, you do realize that in OP's pic, the mechs in that universe are powered by literal magic and black box technology that people who make them don't understand because in the other games by that creator, they're powered by an enslaved extradimensional god.
You guys DO know that right?
DARPA also once seriously considered the idea of the helicarrier like in Marvel comics
>what if it is shot down and crashes onto a city?
>yeah, but what if that city isn't on our side?
“The Ethiops say that their gods are flat-nosed and black, While the Thracians say that theirs have blue eyes and red hair. Yet if cattle or horses or lions had hands and could draw,
And could sculpt like men, then the horses would draw their gods Like horses, and cattle like cattle; and each they would shape
Bodies of gods in the likeness, each kind, of their own.”
Replace god with mecha.
Why does this remind me of the Titanfall interview where the creator said they specifically aren't mechs because "when you think of a mech, you think a slow, clunky, walking tank"
And all I can think is, yeah if you're going by the western definition