How can mecha even compete?

File: heh!.jpg (235KB, 350x450px) Image search: [Google]

235KB, 350x450px

>>15257229
See that's just the thing: they can't!

>>15257229
By not being tank and be a heavy armoured, all terrain IFV that act like infantry instead. So you play them sneekily breeky smart with a full barrage of ATGMs and APDS shells from many, unpredictable directions not match it on tanking contest.

>>15257258
Sorry kid, if not for luck, smart boyfriend and stolen AP, your tin can is dead on episode 1 like your beloved Brenten

File: 1459808364852.png (23KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 200x200px

>>15257229
>shitty vodka powered russian shit driven by drunk russians vs 1000 folded steel IFV made by honorary Aryan piloted by hot blooded Yamato damashii

>>15257229
>How can mecha even compete?
they don't
they won't be, not before some magical breakthrough or discovery of handwavium
but considering this is /m/ there will be many (you)s telling (you) how mechs will defeat other vehicles in their own game for one reason or the other, with or without pretending to be retarded.

File: image.png (600KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

600KB, 1280x720px

>>15260811
Mecha won't beat tanks.

Powered armor will.

Mecha will evolve as larger forms of powered armor, armed with autocannons, to deal with powered armor without the disadvantages of tanks.

>>15260811
>game
>>>/v/

>>15260901
Unless we discover some superlight material mechs are always going to be less armored than tank of equal mass due to the larger size.

Mechs will be usefull in other environments where tank can't operate, like asteroids and other low/no gravity environments.

File: Rx-75-4.jpg (167KB, 432x600px) Image search: [Google]

167KB, 432x600px

Why decide between the two?

>>15266514
The Guntank makes an awfully large target though. There's no thing that says "hit me" as much as a bright blue and red tank that doesn't even have sloped armor.

File: 6654556.png (3MB, 1600x953px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1600x953px

>>15266518

>>15266532
driven by druggies

>>15257229
Robots
>can punch
>can kick
>can grapple
>can use guns
>can use melee weapons
>can move fast
>strong armor

Tanks
>slow as fuck
>can use guns
>strong armor

Tankfags are fucking idiots.

>>15266563
We're not talking about cartoons, we're talking about real life.

/m/echa only makes sense in space, not on earth

Once the government stops suppressing the EM drive and thorium reactors, mechas will be no problem.

>>15266590
>what is boston mechanics
It's not mecha, but robots will soon even power your tanks.
I'd kill for a robot buddy

>>15266590
Sorry I didnt realize mecha were a real life thing? Lmao you /k/ dumbfucks are so defensive about cartoons

>>15266590
Okay, so a pointless conversation that doesn't need to exist.
>>>/k/
And stay there. This board has jack and shit to do with real life.

File: 0653[1].jpg (143KB, 800x531px) Image search: [Google]

143KB, 800x531px

>>15266534

File: 0080.jpg (211KB, 800x375px) Image search: [Google]

211KB, 800x375px

>>15260901
>tfw BE_HUMAN

>>15266668
>>15266680
This is literally the topic of this thread dumbasses.

>>15260901
On one hand it makes me happy to see the Prototype referenced (why didn't Koto make a kit of this of all things in the series?)

On the other hand >>15266706
had to remind me of that scene.

>>15257229
At least use a tank that isn't a joke.

File: Eleven barrels of Hell.png (925KB, 814x538px) Image search: [Google]

925KB, 814x538px

>>15266823

>>15266532
Is that the standard radome set-up in UC or does it just seem that way because everyone's using the same EX-S kit or whatever it comes from?

One day this topic will get old.

>>15266865

A bit of both

What about the loto, from Unicorn. Where do we stand on that?

>>15267104
Pretty solid, thought it was weird how they were primarily used in space from what we saw
>tanks in space
but they're probably better in general on the ground, and they've still got APC capabilities and are probably good enough at what they're made for for special forces to be using them.

>>15266504
Not true, put MBT level armor around the cockpit only, with heavy angling, then covered some of the most important parts against autocannons, then use 2/3rd inch and 1/2 inch steel plates for spaced armor around the entire thing, trying to cover everything important, then put storage space or tons of Kevlar behind the thicc space armor shell.

It's not going to be completely lightweight, but by giving the same armor to a drastically smaller surface area, it'd be a hell of a lot lighter than current tank designs, which I'd argue put an excessive amount of basic armor over the sides and rear when those should just be protected from autocannons and covered in lots of reactive armor.

>how can boring reality compete with badass fiction?

>>15267625
Depends if all you care about is pilot survivability or the survivability of the vehicle as a whole.

Tanks are good because nothing short of a high end ATGM or other vehicle-tier gun can disable them. Having a unit disabled in enemy territory isn't a good situation to be in.

File: image.jpg (87KB, 729x547px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 729x547px

>>15267804
Getting a mobility kill on a tank isn't that hard, any autocannon can easily destroy the tracks of a tank.

I don't imagine robotic legs with spaced armor, Kevlar, and reactive armor tiles covering them would be much more vulnerable than the effectively unarmed tracks of a tank.

>>15257229
>how can mecha even compete?
>both pictures are of real life hardware
>>15266668
>>15266680
>REEE FUCK OFF WE TALKIN BOUT CARTOONS REMOVE TANKFAG BACK TO /K/ REEE
I know this is basically board culture at this point but /m/ going all tumblr safe space everytime on this topic it's like watching yet another "humans always repeat the same mistake" trope in /m/ anime.

pottery

>>15267851
how many blown up joints would like to put on the maintenance bill captain?

>>15267866
>Implying anyone gives a shit about a little maintenance bill in the rare case of a vehicle being mobility killed by autocannons
>Implying it'd even be a problem with how much money the military industrial complex gets every year

>>15257229
They can't because they don't exist.

File: 1442104823230.png (369KB, 554x636px) Image search: [Google]

369KB, 554x636px

>>15257229
>modern tanks
None of them have any aesthetics at all.
>>15266563
Tanks aren't slow you goddamn idiot.

>>15267896
>shit's all good yo trust me
>just fix shit when they break dude the trade off and efficiency is totally worth it
>like, they've got the money man ain't no problem for them
don't fix what ain't broken
don't create problems for a solution
if we are talking about real life here, to get that out of the way, sometimes you want your equipment to be effective and long lasting before needing that maintenance

File: Tank hop.gif (1015KB, 400x240px) Image search: [Google]

1015KB, 400x240px

>>15266563
>slow as fuck
Tanks are actually quite fast if they have to be.

>>15267959
>Efficiency buzzword

>>>/k/

Go and stay go

>>15267851
But tracks are a smaller target than legs, especialy if the tank is in a hull-down position (Meaning you can see only the turret and maybe a bit of the hull)

Also, reactive armor and kevlar aren't going to be that effective against 30mm, though they will deal pretty well aganist light AT weapons like RPGs.

File: Tiger2-sSSPzAbt.501-France.1944-02 Abandoned by its crew.png (99KB, 650x326px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 650x326px

>>15268036
efficiency is not a buzzword.

if you disregard everything for the cool factor you get dysfunctional pieces of shit like any post '42 german tank

File: 65429547.jpg (156KB, 500x464px) Image search: [Google]

156KB, 500x464px

>/k/ shitposting

File: Leclerc-openphotonet_PICT5995.jpg (221KB, 1280x851px) Image search: [Google]

221KB, 1280x851px

>>15268727
This

BOX ON WHEEL STRONK

>>15268744

"Whoops, i crushed the suspensions again"

>>15268727
>>15268779
>Implying a mech can't lay down and take cover behind a hill like a tank
>Implying a giant multi-person tank turret isn't going to be a fuckton easier to hit than a one person mech cockpit and arm+gun+missiles

File: 1468580216023.jpg (307KB, 2048x1363px) Image search: [Google]

307KB, 2048x1363px

>>15257229
Both of you are children before me.

Scopedogs soon boys
https://youtu.be/-7xvqQeoA8c

File: 1440104233819.jpg (74KB, 874x402px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 874x402px

>>15268882
I AM BECOME DEATH, DESTROYER OF WORLDS

File: M60-Patton.jpg (97KB, 768x599px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 768x599px

>>15268845
>Implying a mech can't lay down and take cover behind a hill like a tank

A mech has a much higher profile meaning it has to hulldown behind a very large structure or hill.

>Implying a giant multi-person tank turret isn't going to be a fuckton easier to hit than a one person mech cockpit and arm+gun+missiles

Yes I am implying that because tanks are of a lower profile. Look at pic related. Its design is often criticised because that commanders hatch gave it a high profile. Compare that hatch to a mech.

File: projectThor01.jpg (87KB, 350x265px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 350x265px

>>15268751
The gundams are gonna real autist shitposts on /k/ too

>>15268744
Panther G was tits my man

>>15257229
Mobility. Being able to hit without being hit. That's the advantage a mech has over a tank. Tanks often find it difficult to suddenly change direction or go airborne.

>Build a wall
>Tank is stopped

>Build a wall
>Mech just jumps or flies over it

>>15268907
What part of "lay down" do you not understand you fucking illiterate sack of shit?

>>15269092
10
FEET
HIGHER

File: how to make k buttmad and hate animu.webm (3MB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1280x720px

>>15257229

>>15269259
They made a WoT Anime?

File: 18kx59i1gqfp9jpg.jpg (22KB, 800x582px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 800x582px

>>15269206
>lay down
>still be vulnerable
You could either equip your mecha with a dorky periscope rifle and have it crawl through dirt for miles or build a naturally low armored vehicle with sensors and weapon placed as high as possible.

>>15257229
>T-14
>125mm smooth bore gun
>Kurata
>BB gun

kek.

File: image.jpg (143KB, 1400x754px) Image search: [Google]

143KB, 1400x754px

>>15269343
>Previous posts are talking about hiding in a hull down position
>"How is the mech supposed to hide and keep a low profile while moving multiple miles?!"

This, kids, is what we call "moving the goalpost"

Tanks aren't exactly subtle when driving for miles either, and I think you drastically overestimate how big a one man mech has to be, and underestimate how fucking massive main battle tanks actually are.

A mech can lay down to keep a low profile in a firing position, it's profile only has to be very tall on the move, and (most) tanks are too loud and kick up too much dust to sneak around while moving.

The thread has already established that mechs won't be made as an answer to tanks, they'll be made as an answer to infantry in powered armor, something which all current tank designs aren't prepared to deal with.

>>15269452
You're making an awful lot of assumptions for something that doesn't even exist.

File: MK11.jpg (444KB, 1000x500px) Image search: [Google]

444KB, 1000x500px

Remember that in order for it to be fair you must use this as comparison.

File: Battle_position_armor_level.jpg (204KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

204KB, 800x600px

>>15269206
>lay down to hulldown behind a hill
>completely immobile while hulldown
>has to stand back up to change position and risk getting hit by every anti-tank weapon within the vicinity

As opposed to a tank which can crest over a hill only showing the turret, fire then pull back.

Fuck off cunt. Mechs are gay.

>>15269090
You're attributing properties to walking vehicles that they don't actually have.

File: I came here to laugh at you.png (486B, 93x19px) Image search: [Google]

486B, 93x19px

>>15269452
>they'll be made as an answer to infantry in powered armor
The stupid shit you read on this board. Giant bipedal robots are completely nonsensical from an engineering standpoint. There are more efficient forms to use for any situation you can think of. You're dumb.

I always see the same guy making the same nonsensical argument about why mechs will be viable in these threads. He doesn't understand the first things about physics, combat, engineering or logic. He literally just makes up baseless fantasies like
>it's going to be super duper mobile n sheeit

>>15268882
that Rafael is pure sex

>>15267788
>reality
>boring
Only said by those who lack imagination or experience. Usually both. Real historical accounts are far more interesting than any fiction produced by man and real events your experience will always be much more thrilling than some cartoon or vidya.

>>15270299
yeah and how many catgirls are in it I fucking thought so

File: 1476175322003.jpg (76KB, 640x485px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 640x485px

>>15268751
The /m/-/k/ shitpost exchange is a vital part of both boards.

>>15268751
>mechs are totally gonna beat tanks guise
>no anon how many times are we gonna explain it to you
>STOP SHITPOSTING IN MY SAFE SPACE
>73 / 25 / 48 / 1
no u

>>15270286

Rafale.

But yeah, it's the best looking plane on the planet.

>>15270309

Catgirls are more realistic than mecha.

>>15270205
>has to stand back up to change position
Since when? Humans don't need to stand up to shift position, why should giant robots?

>>15270580

Humans can't fire accurately while moving at top speed. Not even mentioning while moving prone.

Tanks can.

>>15269259

What the fuck is this?

>>15270596

Lesbo witch who decided to fight germans.

airstrikes > all
/thread

>>15270738
It's all situational, but giant bipedal robots are always silly.

>>15270595
>Not putting wheels in the mechs feet and knees so it can roll at high speed with less horizontal bulk than a tank, and crouch down to roll with a lower silhouette

File: Landmate_cross_section.jpg (389KB, 1200x1011px) Image search: [Google]

389KB, 1200x1011px

>>15257229
Why competing 2 machines that has different kind of roles and function?
Its like competing planes with helicopters.

Armored robots will never be an frontal assault unit like tanks irl, at best they'll be a multirole IFV, their advantage as all-terrain, versatile platform will be helpfull for Infantry, especially in buildup or dense areas that tanks will avoid like a plague.

>>15260901
>Powered armor will.
>Impliying power armor aren't mecha

Full retard

They're placed under robotic developement for reasons anon.

File: ChurchillTank.jpg (44KB, 530x306px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 530x306px

>>15271641
Kind of like British infantry tanks except without the armour.

File: Getter the fuck out.jpg (128KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

128KB, 640x480px

>>15257229
>How can mecha even compete?
Because it loo-
>MUH REAL LIFE APPLICATIONS OF GIANT ANIME ROBOTS
Never mind, it's this retarded thread again.

When macross happens and they are just planes.

>>15271730
Well without tanks level of armor at least, thanks to composite armor and anti explosive lamelar technology we can pump one into Scorpion/BMP/LEV or even Bradley level of armor as well, without put too much dent to it's mobility.

It maybe still btfo by modern rpg though, but well, it wasn't her role to begin with.

File: 1474173088716.png (8KB, 400x391px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 400x391px

>>15271641
New to the board, but I got to ask this.

A powered armor is where you wear a suit of armor (leg bits on your legs, arm bits on your arms, helmet on yer head) that is also capable of enhancing certain capabilities through mechanics. A POWERED SUIT.

A MECHA, I always thought, was a vehicle your control similar to any other vehicle, in a centralized location you reside in (remote or on-site) that does require you to put your arm into the arm of the machine, because that arm has no feasible way of filling such a fuckhueg thing.

What also comes to mind is Pacific Rim, with the VR-motion capture style piloting. But that was still a cockpit inside a large vehicle machine.

Another thing about Mecha is that its feasible to rip out arms, legs, and the head and replace them with out bits that, on a powered suit, would interefere heavily with basic human anatomy. Guns, radars and electronic warfare hardware, missile racks, etc etc


Also; hi again. First time on this board.

>>15266613
>government is repressing EM drive & thorium reactors

are you retarded or a /pol/ack?

>>15269452
>mechs won't be made as an answer to tanks, they'll be made as an answer to infantry in powered armor
Nah, they won't be made at all, because there is no militarily viable reason to spend the money and effort to make a humanoid shaped machine.
Think about it, does a jet work like a bird, a truck like a horse, a boat like a fish? So what reason is there to think that the challenges to be faced in the future would require a machine shaped and functioning like a giant man.

>>15270738
>airstrikes > all
You misspelled artillery.

File: image.jpg (166KB, 800x533px) Image search: [Google]

166KB, 800x533px

>>15271859
Jets and other aircraft do what birds do, but better.

Trucks do what horses do, hence "horsepower", but better.

Boats do what fish do, but better.

Mecha will do what humans do, but five to ten feet taller, and better.


Ignorant /k/ fags get out.

>>15271828
Well, that kind of misconception is common so its ok

Mecha, outside of a direct translation of its original names, are actually used to encompas all things mechanical. Yeah tractors, tanks, helies and jetplanes are fucking Mecha. But because they all already becomes a real things and got their own category, now Mecha are used to encompas robotic machines, giant robots are only small piece amongs them.

But then, because of western exposure to Gundam, Voltron, Robotech and Battletech, it engrave a mindset amongs normies that Mecha was only about giant piloted robots, ignoring the fact that it was much wider than that.

Jenny, Drossel, Aigis, GLaDOS? sexy Mecha

Landmates, Mobile Infantry, Madox? absolutely Mecha

Sentry Bot, Protectron, R2D2, T-800? rad Mecha

LS3, US turret bot, Atlas, Handle? real Mecha

Powered armor are exoskelletal machines with inbuild system that designed to assist wearers capability to manipulate their surroundings, with added armor. So it wasn't outrightly a suit, but a robot that function as wearable armor.

File: 1486681912059.jpg (252KB, 1280x960px) Image search: [Google]

252KB, 1280x960px

>>15271918
>Mecha will do what humans do, but five to ten feet taller, and better.

Why the fuck do you think infantry still exists despite the IFV? Mechas are literally slow and expensive IFVs that can walk.

Look at pic related. It has the same capabilities as a mech only it's faster, lighter, smaller and air-dropable. It's also the weakest AFV that's not meant to carry troops.

File: AppleSeed_v04_c25_196.jpg (129KB, 728x1133px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 728x1133px

>>15271952
>It has the same capabilities as a mech only it's faster, lighter, smaller and air-dropable

It was 5x2x2, mech can be create to be smaller than that scale to scale (look at landmate and madox). And it still have comparable mobility and flexibility to a tank, which is a dead meat on jungles, mountain, urban, etc, while mech are have comparable mobility and flexibility to Infantry, while also can be fitted with wheel to each legs for much more effective VSS advantage.

>Mechas are literally slow and expensive IFVs that can walk.

Not necessarily, it depending on design and size, it can even made to fit inside urban buildings.

File: image.jpg (320KB, 1024x686px) Image search: [Google]

320KB, 1024x686px

>>15271952
How is an IFV gonna move through dense forests, rocky environments, and dense urban environments?

How is an IFV gonna hide in an alley to ammo rack the next oversized MBT that drives by?

How is an IFV gonna precisely manipulate various objects and tools for all sorts of combat engineering bullshit?

Mecha will utilize the versatility of the human body to do many jobs with one machine, making it less expensive in the long run despite the individual unit cost, powered armor and their ability to carry fuckhueg missiles with no downside is going to BTFO every ground vehicle that isn't a cheap as fuck armored car or a dedicated APC, mecha will be powered armor but a bit bigger, to carry automatic weapons that can reliably stop powered armor.

>Slow
Go look at Boston Dynamics' new robot, faggot, humanoid robits don't have to be slow.

>Expensive
Combines a variety of tasks into one vehicle, slightly increased per-unit price doesn't negate that less overspecialized vehicles made overall = cheaper, and extreme mass producing one machine is cheaper and easier than producing a variety of different machines, this is how the Commies ruthlessly fucked the Nazis with T-34s.

>Lighter
Take a few modular armor plates off of the more disposable parts of the mech, done, lightweight mech.

>Smaller
Mechs don't have to be xboxhueg, you faggot, why do you morons always insinuate that mecha will be Pacific Rim sized when they can be made only ten feet tall?

I guess rational and honest arguement is just too much for the /k/uks

>Air-droppable
You can do the same with a lightweight mech, air-droppable vehicles can still be pretty fucking big and heavy, they don't need to be made of paper.


Armored Cars, APCs and self propelled artillery/anti-air aren't going anywhere soon but tanks and IFVs are on the way out within the next decades even without mecha or powered armor, random idiots with Kalashnikovs and increasingly powerful RPG-29s will make sure of that.

>people talking about weapon systems as if they operate in a vacuum

>>15272081
>people talking about bipedal giant combat robots as if they aren't retarded

File: 1485892625477.png (202KB, 471x495px) Image search: [Google]

202KB, 471x495px

>>15272042
>its the retarded ESL armchair engineer

>>15272187
>"giant combat robots"
>This thread has been talking about landmates and Scopedog sized mechs

The only retarded things here are you and the other /k/uks

>>15272193
Not an argument.

>>15272205
>tanks and IFV's are on their way out because ATGM's exist
you are retarded

>>15272201
>implying 12ft bipedal combat robots aren't as equally stupid

>>15272042
Nigger you think mass producing a single mech design is better and more cost efficient than a variety of different AFVs? Each AFV has their own role and they are all multitudes better at it than a fucking mech. The only situation a mecha is even partly feasible in is on a forrest mountain. Bitch it's like replacing the entire navy with row boats because aircraft carriers can't maneuver in a small fishing dock.

>>15272042
>How is an IFV gonna move through dense forests, rocky environments, and dense urban environments?
drive through or around them.
>How is an IFV gonna hide in an alley to ammo rack the next oversized MBT that drives by?
that would be the job of the soldiers that are complementing an IFV. It is after all, an Infantry Fighting Vehicle, not an Alone Fighting Vehicle.
>How is an IFV gonna precisely manipulate various objects and tools for all sorts of combat engineering bullshit?
that's why its got a crew.

>>15272042
>Go look at Boston Dynamics' new robot, faggot, humanoid robits don't have to be slow.
A small robot with no armour and no armament moves at half the top speed of a modern MBT and you say it's able to compete with AFVs?

>>15272042
>this is how the Commies ruthlessly fucked the Nazis with T-34s.
The reason the T-34 was so successful is due to its simplicity. You chose a bad example because mechas are not a simple design that can be manufactured with low cost

>bipedal robot, with the smallest being 12ft height profile
>while standing, it's a giant target
>while crouching, it's a stationary target that takes time to stand up or move unlike a low profile vehicle
>it holds guns, but that ends up being more complicated, costly and complicated than integrated weapons systems
>it can walk on some rough terrain, but treads can already do that
>it has no stealth
>its form is immensely complicated with lots of points of failure
>extremely generalized, doing nothing too well
>has less armor to offset weight
>intensely more complicated to control
>impossible to climb because of weight and the necessity of climbing in the first place is nearly nonexistent
Literally no advantage. Humanoids did not develop their form because it was somehow better in combat, it was to accommodate increased brain capacity, to create tools and to see far distances. None of which calls for combat vehicles to take on a humanoid form. There's definitely a future for power armor, but anything approaching a humanoid robot vehicle is pointless. They might one day be developed for sport, though.

File: image.jpg (344KB, 769x1024px) Image search: [Google]

344KB, 769x1024px

>>15272227
>ATGMs continually advancing to the point we simply can't build a practical tank that can survive the most powerful ones, even with reactive armor, and new technology such as powered armor soon making such ATGMs easier and safer to carry than ever before isn't going to have any effect on the practicality of tanks and IFVs

Really made me think

>>15272228
>IT'S STUPID CUZ I SAY IT'S STUPID
not an argument

>>15272246
>The only situation a mecha is even partly feasible in is on a forrest mountain.

Or in cities, or in extremely rocky terrain where AFVs will get stuck with their hull on top of a rock/flip upside down, or in the jungles covering a large portion of the earth that AFVs can't move through.

>Bitch it's like replacing the entire navy with row boats because aircraft carriers can't maneuver in a small fishing dock.
>Naval vehicles
>Ground vehicles

Ever heard of a false equivalency?

>>15272265
>drive through or around them.

Trying to ram an AFV through those environments is a good way to get stuck.

The side that has mecha and powered armor can hide in all those environments with no fear of infantry.

The side that can control important and easily fortified areas will beat the side specialized at driving through giant empty fields, hence why first world militaries can struggle against goatfuckers with RPGs.

>that would be the job of the soldiers that are complementing an IFV. It is after all, an Infantry Fighting Vehicle, not an Alone Fighting Vehicle

This faggot in powered armor comes up and shoots your infantry in the ass, wat do?

Good luck piercing his armor with 5.56.

>that's why its got a crew.

Mech can do heavier work faster than weak meatbags.

>>15272273
>This early prototype Amazon warehouse worker not being a perfect combat vehicle means the concepts it uses can never be implimented in combat mecha and powered armor

>>15272295
>You chose a bad example
Alright, true.
But multipurpose vehicles are still cheaper.

>>15272366
>The side that has mecha and powered armor can hide in all those environments with no fear of infantry.
so why can't the same "random idiots with Kalashnikovs and increasingly powerful RPG-29s" that are the end of tanks and IFV's not be able to take on mecha?
>The side that has mecha and powered armor can hide in all those environments with no fear of infantry
what are they gonna do when the IFV's and their complement of soldiers pinpoint the big ass humanoid robots with drones.
>This faggot in powered armor comes up and shoots your infantry in the ass, wat do?
>Good luck piercing his armor with 5.56
oh so random dirt farmers have AK's and ATGM's that can peirce through tank armor like a hot katana but sophisticated western soldiers only have intermediate cartridge rifles with zero anti armor capability?

File: image.jpg (934KB, 2592x1936px) Image search: [Google]

934KB, 2592x1936px

>>15272353
>A twelve foot tall robot is a giant target

No it is not you fucking retard.

Pic related for example is roughly equivalent to a sixteen foot tall robot, with the torso almost being big enough to fit a pilot VOTOMS style, and the panzer IV it's standing next to is quite significantly smaller than every modern tank.

A twelve foot mech would be a pretty significantly smaller target than AFVs, and the height meme is only relevant in big fields where everyone hides behind hills, which this thread has already established isn't where mecha will preferably be used.

/k/uks have no sense of scale, AFVs are not the size of a Volkswagen Beetle.

>>15272387
AFV's are not the only things that might be shooting at mecha.

>>15272382
Powered armor and mecha are smaller targets than AFVs and can enter buildings where infantry would hide, you can't take out a squad of dudes in powered armor with an RPG before they shoot back like you can with a tank.
Mecha will be powered armor but a bit bigger, carrying autocannons.

File: XM25_July_2009.jpg (205KB, 1280x850px) Image search: [Google]

205KB, 1280x850px

>>15272401
the US army has grenadiers too, not just a single dude with a carl gustav.

Mecha is not real.

>>15272366
>cities
Tanks have proven to add to the effectiveness of infantry in urban environments, mostly due to their strong resistance to ATGMs and other man-portable AT weapons, despite what you see on liveleak. I don't see how power armour will be any better.

>Ever heard of a false equivalency?
It's an exaggerated statement but my point still stands. Every vehicle in the navy has its own role for which it has been proven to be the best at, just like in the army. Replacing most of them with something that offers many disadvantages for one mobility advantage for the sake of logistics alone is a terrible idea.

>This early prototype Amazon warehouse worker not being a perfect combat vehicle means the concepts it uses can never be implimented in combat mecha and powered armor
The Christie suspension attained 167 km/h in 1931 but the combat load (armour, turret, gun) meant that the tanks of that time using this suspension barely managed to clock a third of that. Tanks today can't even go that fast.

>>15272408
I wonder why lol

File: image.jpg (34KB, 600x375px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 600x375px

>>15272410
>Tanks are well known for their strong resistance to ANTI-TANK weapons, despite what you see in videos of actual tanks being hit by ANTI-FUCKING-TANK weapons.

>>15272387
>No it is not you fucking retard.
Yes, it is. Votoms was specifically made by trying to deduce the smallest a robot could be made without falling into power armor territory. The pilot sits in both the torso and the head. From there, it's easy to deduce the proportions of arms, hip and legs. 12ft is roughly the smallest you can make it. Height plays a significant role in any battlefield, open or closed.

File: 1432375363679.png (90KB, 200x218px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 200x218px

>>15272366

Holy shit, just stop.

Ground pressure means mechas are literally fucked almost everywhere.

Abrams tank has ground pressure just twice as high as a humans thanks to tracks. When it weights 70 tons.

Imagine a mecha with that weight but on two legs. It's ground pressure would be ridiculous.

Even if you reduce weight to few tons it would be a clumsy mess. It couldn't run or jump almost anywhere or it would sink knee deep in everything. Even asphalt in cities. And it would have shit armor.

And don't tell me that we will have better and lighter metals in the future. Because you could always make tanks out of them.

>>15272422
What you see is the tank blowing up. What you don't see are the times the rocket failed to blow the tank up. You think ISIS would post a montage of them failing to destroy enemy tanks?

File: THIS AINT NO T-72 MY BOY.webm (330KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

330KB, 1280x720px

>>15272422

>>15272422

They literally are you idiot.

Only few modern tanks were lost to them.

Those ISIS videos of Abrams getting hit and burning are just ammo cooking off through blow out panels. Those tanks were fine and their crews were fine 90% of the time. All it requires is a day or two of repairs and they can be back in action.

>>15272452
And most images of destroyed Abrams and Merkavas and so on have been due to the crews abandoning them, and demo-ing the insides/bombing them with an airstrike to deny
ISIS tanks.

>>15272440
>The ground pressure meme

Regardless of what you think of mechs this one is just demonstrably not a problem, no 12 foot tall mech is going to weigh 70 tons and you simply have to give it bigger feet the heavier it is, it is not going to sink into fucking asphalt you colossal idiot.

Ground pressure is honestly an exaggerated issue in general.

>>15272459

You know that if it walks only one feet will be touching the ground most of the time right?

It would need feet as big as in those retarded plastic toys that barely keep balance.

File: 1486115438312.jpg (34KB, 418x475px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 418x475px

>this thread

>>15272462
>feet as big as those retarded plastic toys that barely keep balance

Big feet help with balance.
Doms have fantastic balance.

One foot touching the ground for the duration of a step isn't going to sink it into asphalt.

You can debate the practicality of mecha all day and that's fine but ground pressure legitimately isn't a huge problem, stop being retarded.

>>15272479
>that image

We really have been invaded by /k/uks

>>15272481
ground pressure legitimately isn't a huge problem
It is if the only redeeming quality of mechas is mobility in that kind of terrain.

>>15272485
>The only places where ground pressure becomes a problem for mecha are mud and swamps/beaches
>Places tanks can also easily get stuck
>But according to /k/uks tanks can drive on the surface of water and mecha will fall into the fucking core of the earth

>>15272484
Yes, many of us have come from /k/, mostly because of regular threads like this that /m/ fags like to post there.

>>15272490
how hard is it to understand that tracks distribute the weight of the tank far better than bipedal legs.
this is why a 90t Abrams can haul itself out of a mud pit with a bit of extra throttle.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCXwgPZXScM

File: railgun-8.gif (23KB, 401x400px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 401x400px

So how long will it be until Rail/Gauss Tanks are actually feasible?

>>15272508
I can guarantee you they already have the technology and plans for it. It won't be until the next major war before they mass-produce it.

>>15272502
Tracks are long but relatively narrow, and they can still hold up 70 ton tanks with some room to spare, big mecha feet with 30% of the surface area can hold up a mech of 30% of the weight.


What the fuck is hard to understand about this?

>>15272565

Do you even realize how legs work? One feet would be in air most of the time.

So one feet would need to have all that surface area.

>>15272527
They have neither a powerplant small enough to fit a tank that can power a railgun and they're still havign trouble with the rails wearing out on the Naval version so no they don't have the tech.

The current limits in railgun designs are due to material limitations. They can't make materials that can withstand the force of firing the gun for more than a couple of shots while conventional guns would consider a barrel life of 100 short the railgun prototypes arn't safe past 10-15 shots.

>>15272639
You do understand that it takes a bit of time to sink into dirt and such to any significant degree, don't you?

The amount of time it keeps it's foot in one place wouldn't be enough to sink much, it'd just leave footprints.

>>15272977

Modern tanks already ruin roads. Mecha would have at least 4x higher ground pressure. If it was running it would be even worse because it would be smashing it's full weight into the ground repeatedly.

It would be worthless in desert or anywhere with soft ground. It would be going kneed deep into poorly made 3rd world roads where most modern wars take place.

Not even mentioning how the single pilot would need to do the work of driver, gunner and commander all at once.

File: 3c6256bcb65be14b47cc8b7578e34c02.jpg (726KB, 1276x1594px) Image search: [Google]

726KB, 1276x1594px

>>15272433
>Votoms was specifically made by trying to deduce the smallest a robot could be made without falling into power armor territory.

Wrong, Landmates has that trophy, it wasn't really a power armor despite looking like one, categorized as small vehicles (it even called a fancy sport bike), and ranged from 2.3 m of standard civilian, police and reconaissance use to 3 m personal siege breaker. You can even pull a tactical espionage action with one due to its sheer compactness.

Votoms was always been parroted because it was one of the entry level anime for "real robot" category.

Jeeze, you're either new or not from around here.

File: RAFALE.png (3MB, 3232x1760px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3232x1760px

>>15268882
So I heard we were posting Rafales?

>>15273074

>Jeeze, you're either new or not from around here.
That explain 80% of this thread.

That'll even explain 80% of shitpost in this board.

I even doubt that /k/eks super robot boogeyman was actually someone's from /m/, its either shitters from /v/, /b/, /a/, or /tv/ that want to stirr some shit, or just a popular excuse.

>>15273127
Could you please attempt to use proper English, your chink is showing.

>>15271859
>You misspelled artillery.
C A R P E T
B O M B I N G

>>15273352
That doesn't invalidate facts that surrounded this thread mr. grammar /pol/ice.

And also, here's (You)r bump, i'm feeling generous right now.

Why are you pushing for a humanoid shape or limiting it to just 2 legs? Screw that, the human form is trash for a military vehicle. Give that shit 4 legs or two legs with some sort of training-wheel-like third leg with a tire or tread on it to act as weight support/balance.

And ditch the arms and hands, integrate the guns to it. You should not be having to run around blowing through your ammo and picking up the enemies weapons like an ADD twelve year old in a halo or CoD match. Thats an extremely situational and niche justification for putting arms on a mech. Your mech should be mounting weapons stronger than most of what an enemy infantry carries into the field and making some sort of giant handheld guns just for mechs is silly. Not to mention in the time it takes your mech to turn, raise its arms, afjust its grip, and fire the guns the mech with a turret is already popping it full of holes thanks to it having less movements needed to aim and fire.

Think outside the box man, stop trying to come up with justifications for using a humanoid form and instead follow the train of thought that legs allow for a wider range of terrains or that mechs could be used as a better infantry support and work out what kind of shape the mech would work best as from there. Find the outcome, don't try and start with it. That's just backward thinking.

File: AnaldestructronmkIV.jpg (227KB, 1920x1279px) Image search: [Google]

227KB, 1920x1279px

>>15273467
Well, Sentry Bots can be a good start, shits nightmare throughout the series.

In 4 they even can fucking strafe like a madman.

I'd agree about the bipedal things, those platform are more fitting for power armor and Landmate kind of mecha more for these days. They'll be very helpfull for space explorations, SOF and heavy infantry.

>>15273572
I'm not really into Fallout but that's a pretty aces design, feels a little distant from the vague 50s aesthetic in general but still awesome.

>>15273374
I didn't claim that it did, maybe you're projecting.

I dealt large giant robots will ever be on the battlefield most likely only Power Armor. They'll probably giant robots for entertainment purposes only .

>>15273074
No, those are power armors. I've been on this board since 2005. You're new in comparison. And very, very mad.

File: 1488010531971.webm (842KB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

842KB, 640x360px

>>15273373

>>15274273
Shirow will dissagree with you even more, but whatever, it still a mecha anyway, and this is an anonymous board, so you're "entitled" for your claimant on O.G. card, if it was real.

Like it matters in the end.

>>15274501
Well let's be honest, you're the little whiner who started trying to call others newfags because they disagreed with your fantasy bs. Get blown out, fido.

File: 1EA09C60.png (447KB, 1280x761px) Image search: [Google]

447KB, 1280x761px

>>15274501
By that definition fucking tanks and jet fighters are mecha

>>15274530
Huh, they ARE mecha m8, big robots are just a small margin of mecha.

Where the fuck have you been?

>>15274582
So why are you arguing for mecha to be made for the military when they already are?

>>15274509
No better than you it seems.

Why not you blow yourself out?

>>15274587
Because im arguing about robots, not mecha as a whole?

>>15274607
mecha=big robots in the context of /m/
stop this pedantic bullshit

>>15274632
Its just you, Ace Combat, LotGH, Yamato and Yukikaze are a thing here.

So does Appleseed, GitS, Madox 01, All You Need Is Kill, Fireball, Terminator, Starship Troopers, Forever War, Bolos, RED, AD Police, Dominion tank police, and Black Magic. GuP is trying to fit in, but it's just an overated moe trash.

Don't kid yourself anon.

Weighing the practicality of mecha is the dumbest idea for a thread and it comes around on a weekly basis minimum, I'm certain.

Can you honestly say you even like mecha, if you really can't grasp the basic point of the genre well enough to NOT force hyper-realism on an inherently impractical concept?

Pretending it's feasible, or even should be, and being unable to enjoy it for what it is just seems incredibly immature. Like you enjoy it but care too much about feeling dumb for liking unrealistic things.

I can see smaller mechs around the height of 3 meters operating in urban, mountain, and forest terrain. They would be used to support the infantry in areas where wheeled and tracked vehicles would encounter difficulties.

Instead of directly competing against tanks, mechs would be used in a support role with infantry in these environments.

>>15275727
Also they'd make sweet VWWWWWWWWWRRRRRRRRR noises.

File: 1449072792264.jpg (282KB, 766x700px) Image search: [Google]

282KB, 766x700px

>>15275727
>3 meters
At that size with a humanoid form, it's just armor. That's not even twice the size of the average person, the only method of viable control would be something like this >>15271641

The difference between power armor and a proper combat robot vehicle is that a combat robot is controlled within a cockpit. Even if it's a motion capture system like G-Gundam, the pilot isn't wearing the robot, he's in the robot. With a 3 meter machine, the pilot's arms and legs have to be used to manually move the corresponding limbs of the machine.

Scopedogs are pretty much the smallest you can make a humanoid combat robot that isn't a power armor. The pilots body parts cannot be in the arms or legs, so the AT pilot sits within the torso and their head is in the robot's head. From there, you can only make the arms, hips and legs so small in proportion to the torso and head where the pilot sits. The only way you could make a smaller AT is by using children.

>>15275776
You could also have something like Code Geass' knightmare frames which I think are all 4 metres tall or so. The body parts can have different proportions because the cockpit is a "backpack" that is built to the rear of the machine's torso.

File: f260424798dca6b70404704dd0778d18.jpg (54KB, 400x395px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 400x395px

>>15275803
ATs are 3.8 meters. They both use roughly the same setup.

>>15266842
Like the Emperor's own hammer.

File: be92e49e037bf997ff5680c908b2af74.jpg (64KB, 640x452px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 640x452px

Fuck mecha, where are our BATTLEBIKES?

>>15266613
Governments don't suppress new, effective types of power generation. They research them then use them to power aircraft carriers and submarines.

File: Rheinmetall 130mm L51.jpg (128KB, 1172x879px) Image search: [Google]

128KB, 1172x879px

Newest German tank gun.

>>15272527
This is not how reality works.

The US navy is the only department of any military seriously pursing railguns since only warships have sufficiently powerful power plants to supply them and at the present time BAE (who are the ones developing railguns for the navy) have yet to deliver a prototype suitable for operational testing.

This is nearly ten years behind schedule. You can find publications by the US Navy indicating that they expected to at least be operationally testing railguns on warships around 2009.

At present lasers have overtaken railguns in how close they are to widespread deployment in that they've successfully been tested on ships and been shown to work with existing fire control systems. Basically they're just waiting for a defense contractor to actually produce a sufficiently high output laser.

Meanwhile railguns are stuck on land, on a testing range shooting one shot every six months while engineers scratch their heads trying to figure out how to prevent the thing destroying its own rails, to little avail.

>>15277261

Will probably be the standard in next gen tanks.

>>15277261
Why can't mecha use this gun?

>>15277701
>realistically
Too big to be used by any humanoid less than 40 feet tall

>In Gundam and shit
Because they already have full auto 120mm machine guns with vastly higher muzzle velocity.

>>15274435
good luck hitting anything from down there :^)

>>15277701
Because they do not exist.

>>15257229
Because they won't have to anon

>drone technology becomes sufficiently sophisticated that air forces transition from low-number high-cost air jets piloted by humans to mass-scale, low-cost drones capable of achieving air superiority through sheer volume
>likewise, land-based armour is phased out by either the same approach through use of flying drones, or through the replacement of vehicles such as tanks and IFVs with drone operated replacements, again focusing on low-cost, high-volume approach
>issues of latency persist however, and are overcome by neural-interfacing with computers; that is, by allowing for human minds to utilise computing power in order to quicken reflexes, increase reaction speeds, decision-making etc.
>however the extent to which this interface can augment human mental capacity is limited, given that too much access to power places too much strain on the brain
>this innovation, coupled with likely increases in powered exoskeletons, allows for the development of powered armour utilising neural interfacing in order to manage weapon systems and allow for a human pilot to utilise the greater speed and power of a powered exoskeleton
>eventually, these suits allow human combatants to return to the battlefield, overcoming drones through their allowing for latency to be exploited by human pilots on the ground, as well as the greater manouverability afforded by such suits allowing for human pilots to defeat slower drone armour
>where these suits make drone armour solutions redundant (within ground based theatres, air superiority is still likely best achieved via drone), a countermeasure is required
>creating larger suits, allowing for larger weapons platforms, is the logical response to increased numbers of powered suits through granting access to heavier weaponry in order to counteract them

oh and they're humanoid-shaped to allow for easier association between machine movement from the pilot's perspective

>>15278138
>my_first_fanfic.txt

>>15266504
>Unless we discover some superlight material mechs are always going to be less armored than tank of equal mass due to the larger size.

Yes finding super light ultra tough alloy would make mechs a hypothetical reality. But realistically speaking if such a material was discovered, it would simply be applied to making existing tanks and airplanes lighter and faster while maintaining the same or higher level of durability. At most we can look forward to strangereal superweapons if such materials are discovered. since they'd allow us to make bigger planes and shit.

>>15278147
This. Even if the materials to make mecha feasible were developed, they would still be impractical from an operations standpoint. Humanoid combat robots just aren't viable forms.

>>15277701
Because the recoil will knock any mecha to the ground

>>15277726
>Because they already have full auto 120mm machine guns with vastly higher muzzle velocity.
How is something that weighs less than twenty tons and lacking any recoil absorption system meant to fire an automatic 120mm cannon without falling over?
Doubly so considering the gun being carried above center of gravity if shouldered like a rifle.

As much as I love the idea of fighting in a mech, I don't think it's going to hapen. A good weapon is a simple weapon. I think that researchers would figure out simpler methods of doing anything a piloted robot could excell at in comparison to any other curent vehicule. Also, mass producing multirole units may be cheaper in some sense, but the loss of one unit would hurt more overall. The saying of "don't put all your eggs in the same basket" applies here. Trying to make something that does everything costs money, and in war losses are expected. Best to send specialised units in that logic since they can be considered expendable by comparison. Play some Space Engineers in survival mode. You'll get where I'm getting at. More moving parts means more chance of failure. I see this argument posted now and then, but nobody ever seems to refute it. It is, however, a very important point. You can't expect everything to be honky-dory all the time. A hit you'd take might be stopped by armor, but parts inside may be knocked lose or bent. Not good for something complex like a mech. Also, I could be wrong, but tanks dedicate a good part of their internals to the engine right? Needs a big engine to move all that bulk. What about the mechs? Votom designs seem to forget this simple point as I fail to see where a sufficient engine/fuel tank could fit. A mecha will probably be just as loud as a tank, if not, louder. As for lateral movement being an advantage for mechs to dodge stuff, that would only hold true so long as the pilot could withstand the shift in innertia. If it's too violent, the pilot would either fall unconcious, or die outright. I think power armors are viable though.

To recap, I don't think mecha would be developed for combat. I could see them developed for utility/ recreational purposes in urban or stellar settings though. And from there, possibly repurposed into weapons. But that's the only scenario I could think of.

>>15278964
ATs aren't using a conventional engine for their general motion. That's pretty much the entire point of the polymer ringer solution, of which they carry ~200 L. Plenty of room for a tank that size in the abomen and pelvis of your average Scopedog, along with the various electricals if we handwave battery tech a dozen generations ahead of ours.

I see. That's pretty cool. It's just a shame they needed to come up with a solution that is out of our reach in reality to justify it though. Otherwise our other vehicules would probably exploit that too.

>>15279004
I always laugh when people say ATs are super realistic but don't know that they use magic motion fluid.

File: IMG_9195.jpg (220KB, 1119x660px) Image search: [Google]

220KB, 1119x660px

Can't we just slap a metal head on there and call it a mech?

>>15279053
TANKS
WITH
ARMS

>>15279045
I mean, they're mildly magical, but it's not _that_ much of a stretch to that stuff from the shape-memory polymers that exist today, especially considering that you're running it in a vaguely defined "muscle cylinder" rather than just sloshing about the limbs. I could see it happening in a decade or three.

I don't know... Still feels prety sci-fi to me. But I'm no scientist.

At any rate, for the current argument, it's probably safer to stick to the thing that are curently possible, since anything in the future could redefine our entire understanding in unexpected ways. Best not to bet on that though.

I just thought of another reason why a mass produced multi purpose unit might not be the best idea. Purely on a tactical standpoint, a specialised unit has its strengths and weaknesses clearly defined, which in a sense makes them more predictable and easier to mobilise. If one such unit was captured, it could be countered fairly easilly. A multipurpose unit's freedom may also end up being a nuisance. Just a random thought that came up. Make of it what you will.

Someone post that old anime short with the powered armors fighting the derpy little IFV's in the forest at night. In the end the last surviving armor pilot gets cornered by an IFV and uses his point-defense laser to doodle it with hot photon love. I know that someone else remembers it.

Man I wish there was an edit button. Sorry for the triple post.

Just thought of one scenario where a multi-purpose military unit might be more viable then multiple specialised units. In areas with little surface to exploit for storage. Places where your numbers would be forcefully limited.

>>15278553
Did you miss the part where I mentioned I'm talking about Gundam?

60 foot tall mecha powered by nuclear reactors that likely weigh more than a maus, there's plenty of unrealistic shit about them but I expect even a 120mm MG wouldn't just knock around someone that massive.

File: rafale inferior.jpg (198KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

198KB, 1024x768px

>>15273099

>>15279222
Yeah, but then we fall back to "why bother making it into a gun for an impractically big machine when we can simply stick it on a tank?" argument.

File: image.png (18KB, 350x300px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 350x300px

>>15279231
In the setting:
-Because mobile suits are just such damn massive machines that even 120mm rounds take a lot of hits to destroy enough components to disable them, it shows tanks being capable of destroying mobile suits but they require massive numbers or a really dumb mobile suit pilot to do so.

-Because in the Universal Century there's all sorts of crazy shit for jamming all non-wire-guided missiles, as well as most other electronics, and a full auto cannon outperforms TOW missiles that have to be armored against some constant EMP bullshit, so the mecha in the setting basically act like scaled up infantry a lot of the time.

-Because mobile suits are amphibious outer-space-to-ground machines designed to effectively maneuver in space without wasting fuel by flailing their limbs like astronauts right before blowing a hole in an orbiting space colony and popping in to commit some mass genocide.
As such they participate in a lot of fleet battles between massive space ships, a situation in which the full auto 120mm is rather useful for it's immense firepower.

They also have 90mm SMGs that are supposedly cheaper and a bit better at piercing armor but overspecialized at doing that whereas the 120mm can use variety of ammunition.

Also mobile suits have legs long enough to run almost as fast as tanks, and can move around any environment better thanks to having rocket boosters with amazingly powerful fictional breakthrough rocket fuel.


Gundam is by no means realistic but things sorta make sense in it's own setting, with all it's weirdly detailed and consistent fictional laws of physics.

If we're going in an unrealistic setting tha custom tailored the very laws of physics to make everything that's not an MS, then yes. You are absolutely correct. But I don't believe this topic is for that particular kind of debate.

Urgh... Text missing... "Everything that's not an MS terribad by comparison"

>>15279282
Hey, I'm not the /k/ommando one who started autisticly screeching about how zakus should just be tanks, you brought it up.

You have me mistaken for someone else buddy. My first post here was the wall of text not too far up from here. XD

>>15257229

Well, keep in mind the Tank is older than the Mecha is and there for has a century or more of refinements that Mecha don't given they're still in their infancy.

>>15279213

Ah, found it. Misremembered a bit, but close.

Studio 4C - "Higan"

http://www.veoh.com/watch/v565240wGAsNgCW/SweatPunch

>>15266518
>torso doesn't even rotate
>has to rotate its entire base to aim laterally
being guntank is suffering

File: ft-17.jpg (572KB, 991x759px) Image search: [Google]

572KB, 991x759px

>>15280104
Even its infancy the tank had a larger role on the battlefield than mechs have to day.

>>15287657
>Large role.
>Kill it crew more than enemy.
>Kill it passengers more than enemy.
>Constantly broke down.
>Germans are laughting with their AP shells.
>Generally rolled out because of incompetent high ups is so desperate that their meatgrinder tactics doesn't work.
>Its so shitty it'll need a faith of a brexit commander to actually makes them stay relevant.

Shit, those factory mechs and dronebot are more relevant in its first time than this shit.

File: FT-17-argonne-1918.gif (99KB, 586x441px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 586x441px

>>15287676
They worked didn't they?

>>15287687
No, its slog, heavy, poisonous, and eat throught military foundings like pattayans whores. In the end, war was ended with US newcomers entering the fray, without even use any of those glorified metal box, and the machine was stuck on hiatus for 20 years.

Those FT tanks of yours? Old school cavalry are more viable than that shit.

>>15287731
What? That's a load of shit. Not only do they not fill the same function as cavalry, which had been all but useless on the battlefield for decades by that point, but tanks saw extensive use from WWI onward and were very much advocated by people like Patton.

>>15267904
Well, that's convenient. Neither does Armata!

>>15287687

'worked' being entire subjective here.
Mechs also 'work'

>>15287763
>Not only do they not fill the same function as cavalry

They are dipshit, thats why they're called "armored cavalry" in the first place.

And for your thought, yes, cavalry are still relevant in WW1.

>tanks saw extensive use from WWI onward

Because like i said, desperate measures. Its only get a shortcoming due to desperate means to break Western lines that already on stalemate for years.

In the end, those tanks makes some nice trench decorations.

>were very much advocated by people like Patton.

And all that thanks to a mild euphoria and Mericans tendency with latching on everythings new, just like they'll do with "iron man"

The other guy is Fuller, who is a closet fascist.

>>15287802
>They are dipshit, thats why they're called "armored cavalry" in the first place.
Is this moron serious? Tanks do not fill the same role as horses. Ever. They called it cavalry because it's "mounted" soldiers as opposed to infantry.

>Because like i said, desperate measures
Uh no. They were used because they were effective.

>And all that thanks to a mild euphoria and Mericans tendency with latching on everythings new, just like they'll do with "iron man"
Patton was a fucking traditionalist who revered military history, you dipshit. You're a goddamn inane goat fucker to think they were just using tanks because they wuz kewl or some stupid shit. They used them because they worked.

Tanks in their initial inception mirrored the role of testudo siege engines. They served in a supporting role for infantry to cover their advance.

Goddamn, you're a fucking retard. Kill yourself, son.

>>15287817
>Is this moron serious? Tanks do not fill the same role as horses. Ever. They called it cavalry because it's "mounted" soldiers as opposed to infantry.

Thanks for the joke anon, i must cap this for /his/.
They're called cavalry because they do what cavalry do best for years, at breaking infantry's battleline.

And they want to do exacly that on the western front.

>Uh no. They were used because they were effective.
>A literal freak.
>Effective.

Lol, effective like ass.
Somme are really some display of effectiveness.... oh wait.

>They used them because they worked.

They used it because they're think pulling a wunderwaffen technique will be a very effective kind of tactics.
It's not, but i must thank Patton and his steadfassness that it'll becomes one in WW2. Well, Germans still do all the works btw.

>They served in a supporting role for infantry to cover their advance.

And wow they're finally did it, after several years of scrap and failure.

But to end your rampant autism, yes, their campaign was a prove that necessity was indeed a mother of invention.

>>15257229
Ever seen a tank stuck in a collapsed road, its a mess to get out?

>>15287928
How would adding legs make it any easier.

>>15287779
Have mechs ever being tested in battle? Have they ever altered the course of an entire war?

>>15287744
>Those FT tanks of yours? Old school cavalry are more viable than that shit.
This is bullshit and you know it.

>>15257229
>T-14
P A P E R T I G E R

A

P

E

R


T

I

G

E

R

>>15289089
Yes, they're called "drones"

They're so fearsome there's speculation that it would replace humans in the open battlefield.

>waaah waaah it wasn't a mech hurrr

Yeah right.....

>>15289316
stop trying to pretend we're arguing about the definition of mecha here and focus on the fact yoy're comparing a century old class of vehicle that has proven itself multiple times through the most intense wars of the 20th century to mechanical bipeds which are still stuck in laboratories being used as punching bags.

>>15289349
You ask for mech and you've got it. I don't need to adherence to your wheeled privelege.

Unsatisfied? Gtfout from this board then.

>>15289349
Just ignore him. He's an idiot who thinks tanks fill the same role as horses. Critical thought is not his strong point.

>>15289426
Oh hello OP, getting BTFO wasn't enought for you? Wan't some of /his/ lawling at your "flawless" logic? Do you wan't i to copypaste the entire 301st crew's testimonies to BTFO you harder?

Ok here's some bump for your pathetic thread. T-14 was a fantastic joke btw.

>>15267851
Getting a mobility kill on a tank is very hard in real life. Tankers tend to know their weak points and have doctrine to deal with it.

t. a guy who has been in a lot of tanks/armored vehicles

>>15268845
The tank can drive/pivot/aim while behind that berm while your mech can crawl and would be forced to expose itself more to do anything else.

>>15289450
Everyone is calling you an idiot. Take a hint.

>>15289426
>who thinks tanks fill the same role as horses
>horses
>when he's explicitly said cavalry

Nice strawman anon. How many threads do you need to refine it?

>>15289479
Nah, just (You)

Nice pulloff btw, your ass gets prolapsed again?

>>15268845
>Implying a mech can't lay down and take cover behind a hill like a tank
The pilot is now looking down at the ground while the mech is looking forward. The mech also cannot move as fast unless it's designed to crawl fast at the expense of speed while upright; in which case why not just cut out the middleman and have a tank that never has as high a profile?
>Implying a giant multi-person tank turret isn't going to be a fuckton easier to hit than a one person mech cockpit and arm+gun+missiles
It's a lot harder to penetrate from the front, that's for sure.
>>15269330
>What is Girls und Panzer

>>15269452
>This, kids, is what we call "moving the goalpost"
No, moving is a very important aspect of combat.
>Tanks aren't exactly subtle when driving for miles either, and I think you drastically overestimate how big a one man mech has to be, and underestimate how fucking massive main battle tanks actually are.
>A mech can lay down to keep a low profile in a firing position, it's profile only has to be very tall on the move,
A tank's profile never has to be very tall.
>and (most) tanks are too loud and kick up too much dust to sneak around while moving.
So would a mech.
>The thread has already established that mechs won't be made as an answer to tanks, they'll be made as an answer to infantry in powered armor,
Or infantry in powered armor will be made an answer to infantry in powered armor.
>something which all current tank designs aren't prepared to deal with.
>Take tank
>Design it to deal with powered infantry
>???
>Victory
>>15270194
No. Mechs must develop parallel with future tanks, so they must be compared with future tanks.
>>15270205
>Fuck off cunt. Mechs are gay.
Nah, they're still cool.
>>15287657
To be fair, we don't have mechs.

File: 1348773829824.png (382KB, 1200x1500px) Image search: [Google]

382KB, 1200x1500px

This thread has been filling, cheers commanders.

>>15290301
>Chairborne

Well thats explain this thread