What are the perks of using solid munitions as opposed to beam

Energy shields were never designed to stop physical objects

>>14394789
The beam shields(where they're present in UC 123 and after) are largely just as effective as conventional shields for blocking solid projectives, iirc.

File: 1448687122938.jpg (433KB, 1200x1652px) Image search: [Google]

433KB, 1200x1652px

>>14394804
UC 0123*

Pic related.

>>14394788
Solid projectiles lose less energy as they travel, as a solid object can't diffuse. That means a shell can theoretically have much greater range than a beam. Additionally, a shell can be more varied in its ordinance. Beams impart thermal and (with some types) kinetic energy to the target. Shells can carry all sorts of warheads. Fragmentary, armor piercing, electronic warfare pods, sensors, bioweapons...all sorts of interesting things.

File: latest.jpg (548KB, 2231x679px) Image search: [Google]

548KB, 2231x679px

>>14394980
Is that why the GM Sniper II uses this thing?

>>14395022
I don't know if that's the official reason, but it makes sense. I know that the stats cited for beam rifles in the OYW had them have maximum ranges of only a couple of kilometers. Even with Beyond Visual Range engagements not being practical with Minovsky particles everywhere, a beam rifle wouldn't even be able to shoot to the horizon. A 75mm shell, though? Hell, we've been firing those to the horizon since the 1880s.

>>14394788
For beating I-Fields?

The other stated reason is that shell firing weaponry does SIGNIFICANTLY less damage to Colony hulls, and thus why the EFSF equipped GM units on Garrison duty with them up until about 0087 apparently

>>14394789
Beam shields have no trouble blocking machine guns. Not sure about cannon or bazooka shells as those don't see much use in the era that beam shields are prevalent in.

>>14395091
I don't think there's ever been a specific "anti-I-field" unit or weapon loadout in UC.. there was the bikini squad using RPGs to knock off the V2's beam-resistant external armor, though.

>>14395091
>For beating I-Fields?

Except the Big Zam is the only canon MA that has an i-field unless I'm forgetting something from Victory.

>>14395156
There's MS with I-Fields in the late UC, from what I remember.

>>14395156
Neue Ziel had one as well, but I-fields as defensive systems aren't common at all.

>>14395156
The Dendrobium and Neue Ziel have them. Which actually did show the benefit of solid projectiles in defeating I-Fields, Neue Ziel had a lot more trouble harming the Dendrobium than the Dendrobium did it, due to the Dendrobium having a lot more rocket launchers and bazookas.

>>14395190
yeah Crossbone has them in it's hands but that's not part of the Tomino-verse. Turn A has one. Nothing in G-Reco has one.

>>14395195
>>14395200

I am not including 0083 because I don't consider 0083 to be canon.

>>14395156
I thought both MA's from 0083 had it as well as the Psyco Gundam and the MK II, the Quinn Mantha from ZZ. I am sure I am missing one

File: 858682131_8851dc14b3_o.jpg (70KB, 600x497px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 600x497px

>>14395214
No? The Psyco Gundam had beam coating. Not an i-field.

>>14395195
Both Neue Ziel and Dendrobium did.
Queen Mansa had a really fancy one that reflect beams back.
Kshatriya and the Unicorns have i-field shields.
Crossbone X3 and X1 patchwork/full cloth have i-fields.

>>14395222
That differs depending on the source.

>>14395211
>because I don't consider 0083 to be canon
You can't just say "I don't like it so it's not canon." Otherwise nobody here would accept the Zeon-wank that was Unicorn as canon.

>>14395233
>0083
>Unicorn
>Crossbone

I'm not including those in my assessment because I don't consider them to be a part of the canon universe. I won't go into that further.

Yes the Queen Mansa has one but that makes Big Zam and Queen Mansa to be the only two.

>>14395237
Gaia Gear has I-field

I was thinking of the MA that they had from CCA but it didn't have one. What about the Rafflesia from F91?

>>14395233
Rafflesia has an i-field.
Rozen Zulu had an i-field shield too.

>>14395248
>>14395237
Rafflesia and Quin Mantha technically don't have I-fields. They have some sort of different technology that is while functionally similar, isn't called an I-field. Rafflesia has some sort of generic "beam barrier" system and the Quin Mantha has "mega particle deflection" system.

>>14395237
You're using that word incorrectly, because it is your own interpretation of the universe, it isn't a type of canon (except maybe head canon).

File: 631424.jpg (528KB, 1903x3178px) Image search: [Google]

528KB, 1903x3178px

>>14395245
>>14395248

Ok so now we have four canon MA's that use an i-field.

For the record, I don't count works that don't involve Tomino in some way as canon. Just to be clear on that I don't see those works as part of his vision and I see them as more of banrise's marketing scheme.

>>14395265
>You're using that word incorrectly, because it is your own interpretation of the universe, it isn't a type of canon (except maybe head canon).

canon, n. a general law, rule, principle, or criterion by which something is judged.

I am 100% certain I am using it correctly as accord to the, uh idk, dictionary? You can disagree or not on what you and I consider canon but I am not misusing the word.

File: Eliminatecancer.jpg (120KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 1280x720px

>ITT: /m/ forgets it's lessons about dealing with tripfags.

>>14395271
I haven't known "only works that involved Tomino" to be a general sentiment or principle among Gundam fans as a type of canon.

You cannot say your own interpretation is important or well known enough to constitute a general law or principle. I haven't seen any other Gundam fans say that for it to be common enough to be considered popular law, rule, principle, or criterion.

>>14395266
Gaia Gear isn't a mobile armor, it's a man machine. Rozen Zulu is from Unicorn which you don't take as canon. Rafflesia has a different type of defensive system.

File: 1396243339723.png (1MB, 960x720px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 960x720px

>>14395304
>You cannot say your own interpretation is important or well known enough to constitute a general law or principle. I haven't seen any other Gundam fans say that for it to be common enough to be considered popular law, rule, principle, or criterion.

That sounded so stupid it made me tired.

>>14395304
>Gaia Gear isn't a mobile armor, it's a man machine. Rozen Zulu is from Unicorn which you don't take as canon. Rafflesia has a different type of defensive system.

Well obviously, but Gaia gear does transform into a plane. Also I wasn't including Rozen Zulu I linked to two post. One mentioned Queen Mansa and the other mentioned Rafflesia. I did not include Rozen Zulu in my total but that's four machines that have some sort of i-field for sake of arguing my point.

Big Zam
Queen Mansa
Rafflesia
Gaia Gear

>>14395320
If stupid things made you tired you'd be asleep 24/7 you fucking shit.

>>14395320
>That sounded so stupid it made me tired.
Believe it or not, one person's interpretation doesn't constitute a canon. Let's use another example like "only animated is canon". That has slightly more merit because there's actually a fair number of idiots who believe that (and keep repeating it), so it could loosely be considered a kind of canon but only unto themselves. Your interpretation is only an interpretation, and citing "only things Tomino worked on are canon" as a type of "law" isn't realistic to the definition of canon.

>Well obviously, but Gaia gear does transform into a plane.
Trying to categorize the Gaia Gear as a mobile armor because it has a aeroplane/spaceplane mode doesn't make sense. Dedicated aeroplanes and spaceplanes in Gundam aren't even considered mobile armors.

>One mentioned Queen Mansa and the other mentioned Rafflesia. I did not include Rozen Zulu in my total but that's four machines that have some sort of i-field for sake of arguing my point.
Well if you're going to ignore technicalities, then consider the Nu Gundam for its beam barrier. Zeta may also count because it was able to produce a visible I-field.

>>14395385
Don't feed the troll.

>>14395397
>Believe it or not, one person's interpretation doesn't constitute a canon. Let's use another example like "only animated is canon". That has slightly more merit because there's actually a fair number of idiots who believe that (and keep repeating it), so it could loosely be considered a kind of canon but only unto themselves. Your interpretation is only an interpretation, and citing "only things Tomino worked on are canon" as a type of "law" isn't realistic to the definition of canon.

It's not rocket science. A lot of people share my opinion on what's canon. I originated from Gundam Official which was well over ten years ago. I have know a lot of people. Don't read too much into what I say because I won't take the nerd culture seriously.

>>14395397
>Trying to categorize the Gaia Gear as a mobile armor because it has a aeroplane/spaceplane mode doesn't make sense. Dedicated aeroplanes and spaceplanes in Gundam aren't even considered mobile armors.

I wasn't trying to categorize it as an MA. It's late.

>>14395397
>Well if you're going to ignore technicalities, then consider the Nu Gundam for its beam barrier. Zeta may also count because it was able to produce a visible I-field.

The title of the thread is ' What are the perks of using solid munitions as opposed to beam weaponry' so I'm sure those can apply as well. But, at the end of the day I only consider thus far two machines by what I'm reading here, to have i-fields by the strictest definition of what is an i-field and what I consider canon. Big Zam and Gaia Gear. You happy?

>>14394804
They would collapse if you hit them with a large enough physical object though.

Uso does this to defeat the Zanneck.

File: 1399311457808.jpg (123KB, 1128x1810px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 1128x1810px

>>14395486
Cool. I'm long overdue for a rewatch of Victory. By the time it's over I'll be miserable they never made a kit of pic related.

>>14395478
Alright then, backing off.

>>14395486
It wasn't the impact that necessarily took out the shield, the extra parts carry nuclear reactors and were causing large explosions when they blew up. The Shrikes even used the same tactic to take down Zanscare warships quickly by launching parts as makeshift bombs into the open hangars.

>>14395237
>>14395266
>>14395271
>>14395271
>>14395320
well aren't you an insufferable douche canoe

>>14395556
You must be new here.

>>14395266

All of it is Banrise's marketing scheme really. He was asked by someone to make every single work bar G-Reco, which he asked Banrise about making - but they made him make changes, including making it a Gundam show so far as we know. He didn't make any of them out of pure artistic vision, he made all of them on request for a pay-check and hitting certain targets (like making the original a space sci-fi for instance). And all of the sequels were works he's been rather vociferous in his dislike of making, but did so anyways, because it's his job and he wanted work. Counting out some because they don't meet his vision but only marketing is ignoring that he only had that vision in the first place because of other people looking to make money off toys. And that he didn't even want to make most of them but did because marketeers told him too, and in cases like Victory actively meddled in the production. And that's only a case we know about. There's probably plenty of others we don't know about.

>>14397387
>All of it is Banrise's marketing scheme really. He was asked by someone to make every single work bar G-Reco, which he asked Banrise about making - but they made him make changes, including making it a Gundam show so far as we know. He didn't make any of them out of pure artistic vision, he made all of them on request for a pay-check and hitting certain targets (like making the original a space sci-fi for instance). And all of the sequels were works he's been rather vociferous in his dislike of making, but did so anyways, because it's his job and he wanted work. Counting out some because they don't meet his vision but only marketing is ignoring that he only had that vision in the first place because of other people looking to make money off toys. And that he didn't even want to make most of them but did because marketeers told him too, and in cases like Victory actively meddled in the production. And that's only a case we know about. There's probably plenty of others we don't know about.

[citation needed]

>>14397508

Tomino is a work for hire director. There's interviews with him on Youtube where he uses that exact phrase and states that he made ANT not because he wanted to, but because Banrise asked and that he doesn't want to make a ZZ:ANT but again, he will if they ask. He's also said he dislikes making the sequels often and loudly, even going so far as to put a note in the Victory DVD sleeve not to buy it. And he first announced G-Reco as a non-Gundam project, then a while later as a Gundam one. Which part do you want a citation on?

>>14397596
Just ignore the shitposter like everyone else.

>>14397508
>>14397596

And here's an interview with Tomino that says much the same, first result for "Tomino Interview" on Youtube.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uAYa0eVJog8

Within 3 minutes he says that he doesn't want to make any other changes to earlier Gundam shows and hasn't heard anything about ZZ:ANT movies. He has to hear about them before making them. What do you think that means out of interest?

>>14395122
>I don't think there's ever been a specific "anti-I-field" unit or weapon loadout in UC.

The Big Zam's i-field was so effective because the federation had such a giant hardon for beam weaponry. Missiles worked on it fine.

File: latest[1].jpg (78KB, 600x479px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 600x479px

>>14397630
>Missiles worked on it fine.
Some of them didn't.

File: SYSTEM_∀-99_(WD-M01)_∀_Gundam_-_Technical_Detail.jpg (1MB, 1500x2065px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1500x2065px

>>14397628
My assessment? It means fuck all.

>>14397630
I wonder of the real dynamics of I-fields are since Tomino only really had two units with i-fields in his works. I think an i-field is meant to be something that requires a tremendous amount of power to run/use like a beam sabre constantly being on. Gaia Gear a was probably meant to represent that quantum leap in technology that I don't believe should have been retconned into 0083.

Actually, Turn A had an i-field also but that's 500 years after the end of the UC, which nobody really knows. That's 3 i-fields in a little over a thousand years.

>>14398293

It means fuck all that Tomino has to be told whether something is being made? Okay. I'm sure it means fuck all that he's known for disliking making the sequels and complaining about all of them while still making them too. I presume you also don't believe that he's only a hired director making what he's told either. It's probably total coincidence that he doesn't and never has owned Gundam, which was owned by other people from day one despite him creating it.

> a little over a thousand years

Try 5000. And that's just a minimum. Dianna lists UC as being 5000 years ago in the movies and 10, 000 years ago in the tv series.

File: 1446324424946.png (361KB, 525x733px) Image search: [Google]

361KB, 525x733px

>>14398359
Yeah but G-Reco says the UC was 1000 years ago. Tomino said G-Reco takes place 500 years after Turn A. That's what I consider to be the correct dates.

Haven't seen the movies but Lady Bjordno or whatever said it's 10,000 years in the series. She was a dumb earth person with no technology whereas the factions in G-Reco were gifted with technological developments which leads me to believe that they would be closer to the correct assumption.

>>14398425

The factions in G-Reco were speaking from hearsay. The people in Turn-A were speaking from records. A lot of the people in G-Reco weren't particularly well educated historically either, whether they were from Earth or Venus. I don't know why you don't just say you prefer G-Reco and leave it at that.

>>14398437
Stop feeding the troll, christ. You are not going to magically make Snapfag change his ways, the same way you're not going to make BK stop worshipping Zeon.

And don't give me "b-but I'm bored", there are hundreds of better things you could be doing with your time.

>>14398437
>I don't know why you don't just say you prefer G-Reco and leave it at that.

Because I don't have to? If I didn't say why I thought the G-Reco dates were the right ones someone else would ask why. G-Reco is my favorite series and I've seen it four times. I don't see what justification there is to listen to Lady Bjorno over Amerians that have built their own mobile suits and aren't relying on ones they find in the ground.

btw these captchas are becoming unbearable.

>>14398557

Because those Amerians are speaking from memory and not noted to be a good source. The show even pokes fun at people's poor grasp of these kinds of things by having Venutians think all Earthers are afraid of becoming kuntala due to lack of familiarity (or something like that anyway, I don't recall exactly).

If someone is reading from an actual historical record they're much more likely to be correct, regardless of their formal education or circumstances.

>>14398585
>If someone is reading from an actual historical record they're much more likely to be correct, regardless of their formal education or circumstances.

So Diana read five thousand years from the memory room? I'll have to see it for myself.

>>14394788
They work underwater

File: mashymre newtype powers.webm (3MB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 640x480px

>>14398293
>Gaia Gear a was probably meant to represent that quantum leap in technology that I don't believe should have been retconned into 0083.
What quantum leap? The Neue Ziel and GP03D's I-fields are functionally the same thing as the Big Zam's I-field and haven't changed much.

If anything, the GP03D's I-field is less well-thought out than the Big Zam and Neue Ziel's version because they mounted it on the exterior where it was vulnerable rather than being protected and hidden on the inside.

By the way, small I-fields that protect a single mobile suit exist in Zeta and ZZ as products of newtype/psycommu/biosensor enhanced miracles.

>>14394820
Why not just git gud and shoot/slash the middle?

>>14398696
just use pay2win weapons like VSBRs

V2AB has I-fields as well.

>>14398729
Noted, but I don't remember it using any kind of i-field. The wiki said it's shield didn't have one so if it does have one I have no idea where it's located. Let me check mahq.