Well of Souls Forums

You could have exactly the same background material in Battletech with giant tanks instead of mechs. I get that mechs are the whole point of the game, but in terms of lore the requirements for mechs over tanks is completely artificial.

Diodri wrote:3: Why not use vehicles and tanks?

Well, there are vehicles in Battletech. They have lasers and missiles, and do stand a chance of damaging mechs, but the mechs are 20-50 times bigger than the vehicles. They simply have too much armor, and much bigger guns. So why not make bigger vehicles instead? Because a dozen wheeled vehicles on rough, undeveloped worlds, with no roads and harsh environments and often no atmosphere and tons of radiation; are going to be much harder to maneuver and maintain than 1 giant self contained robot. (Forgot to mention, why is a bipedal mech more maneuverable than tank treads? The mechs have jump jets, which is basically a jet pack for the mech which let's it jump over mountains. XDD )

Tanks treads are quite good at offroad terrain, and they can carry much more weight than a bipedal mech, as discussed above; a tank can be larger and heavier than a bipedal mech without sinking into the ground. To get the same ground pressure a mech's feet would need to be like giant snowshoes, and that's not very maneuverable. There's no reason why tanks can't use the same jump jets that the mechs are using, so that's not an excuse either.

Arioch wrote:You could have exactly the same background material in Battletech with giant tanks instead of mechs. I get that mechs are the whole point of the game, but in terms of lore the requirements for mechs over tanks is completely artificial.

Diodri wrote:3: Why not use vehicles and tanks?

Well, there are vehicles in Battletech. They have lasers and missiles, and do stand a chance of damaging mechs, but the mechs are 20-50 times bigger than the vehicles. They simply have too much armor, and much bigger guns. So why not make bigger vehicles instead? Because a dozen wheeled vehicles on rough, undeveloped worlds, with no roads and harsh environments and often no atmosphere and tons of radiation; are going to be much harder to maneuver and maintain than 1 giant self contained robot. (Forgot to mention, why is a bipedal mech more maneuverable than tank treads? The mechs have jump jets, which is basically a jet pack for the mech which let's it jump over mountains. XDD )

Tanks treads are quite good at offroad terrain, and they can carry much more weight than a bipedal mech, as discussed above; a tank can be larger and heavier than a bipedal mech without sinking into the ground. To get the same ground pressure a mech's feet would need to be like giant snowshoes, and that's not very maneuverable. There's no reason why tanks can't use the same jump jets that the mechs are using, so that's not an excuse either.

I think its certain terrain that tanks don't work as well, hence the timberjack for logging, but its far and few between.

But going bigger in tanks isn't always better. As awsome as the Warhammer 40k Baneblade is, size dosn't have limitations. THere was a giant tank done last minute by the Germans in WW2 called the mouse that was so massive it coulnd't move very well.

In short, after a set size, you are going to have a problem with tanks as you are with mecha.

There is also the fact that while they are still the best mobile platform for heavy firepower, experts are looking for a replacement due to asymmetric warfare. The problem is, even if its not the best choice for it its still the best option we have.

The bigger and taller you make your vehicle, the chances of the enemy destroying it increase substantially. Having a mech that stands 20 feet tall, means tanks will snipe it from miles away due to its large profile. This is before getting into ground clearance or the logistical burden it would cause. Remember, if you have technology that can make a mech viable, that same tech will make tanks and fighters more effective.

SaintofM wrote:I think its certain terrain that tanks don't work as well, hence the timberjack for logging, but its far and few between.

I don't think that's an issue of "terrain" as much as it is the need to move among fallen trees without crushing them. A logging vehicle and an armored fighting vehicle are two rather different use cases.

Ok, here's a vid from Professor Otaku, a big time mech fan, goes over some mech design notes. Most of it is for making them distinct, but others are just for funsies.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_0PEu_ ... x=2&t=328s


In case you didn't watch the video, think of why the mecha is there.

If its more of a real robot (insert laughter here) then why was it designed? For Land, for sace, for water, for the air, jack of all trades? Is this a lightning bruisee that can do hit and run attacks, or is this, well, a tank that can take a few hits while laying down the hurt.

If its a super robot (Mongenzer Z, Power Rangers, Voltron) then its there to inspire the masses, and easily convey a theme.

Also Standard and Heroic.

Most machines are purpose built, and very few of them were designed for frills. Clunky looking is acceptable in design, especially if its more construction base in origins. Even then, with War Machines, if its sleek looking its for a purpose. THere is no stealth Hummer, No Stealth Tank, and most helicopters are either egg shaped or rectangular for a reason. An Airplane can be sleek but that's because that reduces drag so it can go faster. In the case of modern stealth weapons like the Night Hawk bomber of the F-22 Raptor fighter plain, to not be picked up by radar.

Heroic models, the ones the leaders or the main characters might be piloting, might be better looking but need to have some omag or resemblance to the OG model.

Super Robots need to be garish by design. They live and die by their gimik, and more charitably to sell toys to children.

If its aquatic, fins and propellers are a great start. The Cancer and the Pieces Mobile suits from Gundam, down below, are a great start in my humble opinion.




Space built you can go a little more nuts with as you just need rockets to propel you to and fro. THe best design Proff says is probably a Ball when it comes to space, and who wants to pilot that, but if you want realism the cofins from Gundam 79 is a good start.

FOr a context of a show, it needs to be a balance between reconizablity and functionality. 3 Distinct features from fifteen feet away. Its X-Wing vs Tie Fighter on a larger scale.


Things to avoid: Most backpack. If it dosn't have a purpose (thrusters, extra weapons, power suply) leave it or find a better purpose.

Well, sometimes the best "explanation" is essentially no explanation at all. When it comes to giant robots or superheroes or the like, I think that often the less time spent trying to explain things, the better. Sure, your world and everything in it should be internally self-consistent, but that doesn't necessarily mean it has to be "realistic."

It's possible to do a fantastical premise as ultra-gritty-realistic (Gundam 08th MS Team, Batman Begins), but it's really hard to pull off. If I had to do a giant robot story, I think I'd head in the Diebuster direction.

The other anime related option was Macross, where the concept of the mecha was to compensate for the scale of the than speculative enemy alien species, which were five times the height of a human. Thus the mecha was designed to be essentally robotic power armor (transformable into fighter craft) that would compensate for the humans' smaller size as infantry units to be able to fight on an equal or greater footing. That the enemy has combat pods was unknown at the time, but the new mecha was able to combat them. Just the numbers game was greatly against the humans when a single enemy fleet easily out numbers Earth's defenses by a scale of 4 million or more to one, and the entire species war capacity outnumbering Earth by several billion to one in starships.

But Deculture (cultural victory) was unexpected, if costly.

If we ever make space fighters, I think they'll look and work like Starfuries.



Unfortunately, given the g-force limits of the human body, such fighters would almost assuredly be drones.

Bad for mechs and transformers that every joint is weakness in their armor, which can be cracked to open it. And also, whst prevents installing jump jets and extra limbs at top of any tank? As tank is well grounded, it can hold single handedly any weapon which can flip the mech of same size when used.

bunnyboy wrote:Bad for mechs and transformers that every joint is weakness in their armor, which can be cracked to open it. And also, whst prevents installing jump jets and extra limbs at top of any tank? As tank is well grounded, it can hold single handedly any weapon which can flip the mech of same size when used.

That was actually a plot point in Full Metal Panic. One of the less serious season one episodes, there were militar mechs being used for civilian fun and games at a carnival. Two of the contestents were a father and son team in the cockpit and the dad remmebered that his son's model of the same mech was so detailed it had the same weakness of the arm, and so decided to break his foes arm.

Another classic reason for anthropomorphic battle armour is that you are an advanced alien species and you discover this primitive race that has numer of highly skilled warriors who you are sure could be very useful in your war if they could just somehow be equiped with advanced weapon systems? Hmmm

Jagged wrote:Another classic reason for anthropomorphic battle armour is that you are an advanced alien species and you discover this primitive race that has numer of highly skilled warriors who you are sure could be very useful in your war if they could just somehow be equiped with advanced weapon systems? Hmmm

That trope works the same whether or not the superweapons are anthropomorphic.

Arioch wrote:

Jagged wrote:Another classic reason for anthropomorphic battle armour is that you are an advanced alien species and you discover this primitive race that has numer of highly skilled warriors who you are sure could be very useful in your war if they could just somehow be equiped with advanced weapon systems? Hmmm

That trope works the same whether or not the superweapons are anthropomorphic.

I don't know, its not hard to imagine a situation where the pilot didn't realise they were even in a vehicle and how that might not be possible if the vehical had tracks

Jagged wrote:I don't know, its not hard to imagine a situation where the pilot didn't realise they were even in a vehicle and how that might not be possible if the vehical had tracks

Didn't realize they were in a vehicle? Now you're just getting silly.

I think about one realistic application for mech - fights against militia in cities or similar rough terrain. Bullet armor is rather light weight for mech. High profile is useful to fire against covers and second floors. Also mech can just step over barricades that stop most of wheeled vessels. Also mech can crouch that allows to fire and hide behind walls.

SVlad wrote:I think about one realistic application for mech - fights against militia in cities or similar rough terrain. Bullet armor is rather light weight for mech. High profile is useful to fire against covers and second floors. Also mech can just step over barricades that stop most of wheeled vessels. Also mech can crouch that allows to fire and hide behind walls.

Imagine the set of a japanese kaiju movie. You are wearing the big rubber monster suit and the enemy is using radio controlled model tanks to shot at you. You can duck behind buildings and tower blocks. But watch out for those power lines ... there is real electricity in there

I meant comething like this: Against something like this:

SVlad wrote:I meant comething like this:

SpoilerShow

Against something like this:

SpoilerShow

The two would never fight against each other, against mechs insurgents would probably focus their efforts with IED traps in order to cripple the mechs and topple them. Technicals and other light vehicles are found only in areas where there are no organized and well supplied military forces since its far too easy to cripple civilian grade equipment with light weapons fire.

Plus if you have the tech to make mechs, you probably have enough tech to make power armor for infantry with combat support drones that would allow for superior flexibility in operations (including urban terrain) with a far lower burden on logistics.

Personally, I'm fine with the "matching a neurally-piloted vehicle form to the pilot's form enables higher action pace and broader action options by cutting out brain-command translation delays and providing a familiar toolset that enables more complete exploitation of the pilot's creativity" line of thinking.

BUT, since others are still dissatisfied, how about this; instead of trying to find a good reason to validate the existence of mechs, why not find a bad reason to validate their existance? Specifically, I'm referring to something akin to the development of the M2 Bradley as depicted in The Pentagon Wars where the top brass believe themselves infallible and ingenious then keep foisting progressively ludicrous half-considered design requirements on the vehicle development team.

People make bad decisions and commit massive resources to their bad decisions if the check and balances are unsuitable. Maybe the mechs have all the flaws stated previously, but the military keeps producing them because the issues keep getting blamed on pilot error because it would be bad for one's career to blame the higher-ups' strategic choice to back the mech, and then the mech just "works" in the realish setting because the empire using them has the industrial capacity to replace losses faster than the opponent does.