Don't the fact that mechs use fusion engines make them MASSIVLY superior to tanks in terms of logistics?
You can have a lance of mechs riding around in their dropship with basically just repairs and ammo supplies to worry about. They've got effectively infinite range. Tanks a great, but they can only drive out so far from their base/dropship before you have to either refuel them or carry them around again. Mechs you can just drop off in the mountains and let them crawl around for months at a time if you need to.
Omni mechs go even farther in terms of streamlining logistics.
0
Options
OrcaAlso known as EspressosaurusWrexRegistered Userregular
Don't the fact that mechs use fusion engines make them MASSIVLY superior to tanks in terms of logistics?
You can have a lance of mechs riding around in their dropship with basically just repairs and ammo supplies to worry about. They've got effectively infinite range. Tanks a great, but they can only drive out so far from their base/dropship before you have to either refuel them or carry them around again. Mechs you can just drop off in the mountains and let them crawl around for months at a time if you need to.
Omni mechs go even farther in terms of streamlining logistics.
...and why can't you use the same tech for tanks as you do for your mecha? Don't neglect repairs, they're a huge part of keeping an armored unit anything except an extremely expensive pillbox.
I don't think you understand. Mecha would be smaller than tanks for the same weight class because they would be able to articulate into whichever form they needed to. There aren't tanks that can articulate their weapons because the technology does not exist to do so. Hence "If we could do it". As a result it would be harder to hide a tank than it would be a mecha in addition to the fact that knocked over buildings are more relatively difficult for tracked vehicles to navigate
0
Options
Inquisitor772 x Penny Arcade Fight Club ChampionA fixed point in space and timeRegistered Userregular
Don't the fact that mechs use fusion engines make them MASSIVLY superior to tanks in terms of logistics?
You can have a lance of mechs riding around in their dropship with basically just repairs and ammo supplies to worry about. They've got effectively infinite range. Tanks a great, but they can only drive out so far from their base/dropship before you have to either refuel them or carry them around again. Mechs you can just drop off in the mountains and let them crawl around for months at a time if you need to.
Omni mechs go even farther in terms of streamlining logistics.
What is stopping someone from putting the same fusion engine into a tank-shaped package instead of a giant bipedal mech?
+2
Options
OrcaAlso known as EspressosaurusWrexRegistered Userregular
I don't think you understand. Mecha would be smaller than tanks for the same weight class because they would be able to articulate into whichever form they needed to. There aren't tanks that can articulate their weapons because the technology does not exist to do so. Hence "If we could do it". As a result it would be harder to hide a tank than it would be a mecha in addition to the fact that knocked over buildings are more relatively difficult for tracked vehicles to navigate
Articulation is diametrically opposed to armoring though. You're better off just being smaller and mounting less armor to greater effect. A smaller target is always better, all else being equal. Aside from ground pressure concerns. Knocked over buildings are difficult for even human beings to navigate; what do you think something with a higher ground pressure is going to do? A tank is just armor, a power plant, a gun, ammunition storage, and a drivetrain with enough space for a human crew crammed into it. Just the turret alone is a huge compromise in terms of complexity and durability vs. flexibility. What does adding a vastly more complicated, more vulnerable, and heavier drivetrain and turret (arms) add that makes it worth the cost? It isn't like air power where there is a radically new capability that trumps all. It's just a new and different tank in a different form factor.
Unless you're talking about technology that is so advanced the tank is reconfiguring its armor surfaces in realtime to present the sharpest possible angle to any threats in the vicinity, and has support structures with enough rigidity that can work, and at that point it's still not really mecha. It's a different kind of cool though.
Yes but a tank is not actually smaller, its larger. And articulation lets you angle armor efficiently regardless of the attack vector in a way that is not possible with a tracked vehicle. Hence "if its possible".
Why do we ever make things more complicated? A: because they're better.
0
Options
MorninglordI'm tired of being Batman,so today I'll be Owl.Registered Userregular
You really want mechs huh?
I can dig it. Mans gotta have dreams.
I'm not interested in continuing this argument tho, it's starting to get circular. We'll find out if they ever make them.
There is one particular scene from an anime involving mecha I wanted to bring up tho because I thought it was a really neat touch. It's from the light novel of full metal panic (way past any of the anime).
There's a scene where there's a few mechs and they are facing a tank battalion on open ground. And it's pretty much straight up stated that the mechs are going to lose in this situation, so they had to bend over backwards to try and make things favourable. I can't remember how that battle ended but the tanks were straight up presented as "we are fucked now".
I thought that was particularly cool.
(PSN: Morninglord) (Steam: Morninglord) (WiiU: Morninglord22) I like to record and toss up a lot of random gaming videos here.
0
Options
H3KnucklesBut we decide which is rightand which is an illusion.Registered Userregular
Then the monkey paw curled and EA picked up the exclusive rights.
It used to belong to Activision, back when they were cool. Y'know, the 90s. REMEMBER THE 90s YOU GUYS?!
I read that is now considered the oldies.
It's literally 30 years ago.
What's the Battletech version of turning to dust? Piloting an Orion?
Piloting a Spider?
Naw, the "Live Fast Die Young" demographic pilots Spiders.
Pretty sure the "Turning to dust" demographic are those MechWarriors still piloting their family's ancestral Unseen, held together by bailing wire and duct tape.
Here I figured you would say piloting a quad mech.
Ok but quad mechs are inherently superior to bipedal mechs but also inferior to tanks the size of mechs because bipedal mechs are actually incredibly dumb in so many ways not that I care because bipedal mechs are fuckin' awesome and there we go entire argument done and over with.
Nah. Bipedal mechs have a lot of advantages over tanks and quad mechs.
They work on uneven ground.
Mountain goats say hi?
Quads would be much better than bipeds on uneven ground. Whether they're structured like ungulates, carnivora, lizards, arthropods, or walking turrets, all of those can mountain climb very well.
Then the monkey paw curled and EA picked up the exclusive rights.
It used to belong to Activision, back when they were cool. Y'know, the 90s. REMEMBER THE 90s YOU GUYS?!
I read that is now considered the oldies.
It's literally 30 years ago.
What's the Battletech version of turning to dust? Piloting an Orion?
Piloting a Spider?
Naw, the "Live Fast Die Young" demographic pilots Spiders.
Pretty sure the "Turning to dust" demographic are those MechWarriors still piloting their family's ancestral Unseen, held together by bailing wire and duct tape.
Here I figured you would say piloting a quad mech.
Ok but quad mechs are inherently superior to bipedal mechs but also inferior to tanks the size of mechs because bipedal mechs are actually incredibly dumb in so many ways not that I care because bipedal mechs are fuckin' awesome and there we go entire argument done and over with.
Nah. Bipedal mechs have a lot of advantages over tanks and quad mechs.
They work on uneven ground.
Mountain goats say hi?
Are we just going to ignore the scale of mass and weight involved? Like, people are talking about bipedal mechs being more agile but if you put that much weight onto such a small surface area I'm not convinced that mechs don't just sink into most terrain, particularly the urban ones that people hilariously think will provide some kind of cover.
Really if you want to copy a human's ability to balance, you don't copy the legs, you copy the inner ear. :bzz:
+3
Options
H3KnucklesBut we decide which is rightand which is an illusion.Registered Userregular
edited December 2020
Is anyone else having trouble viewing the Catalyst store? I can't get it to move past the notification about not being able to deliver physical goods by Christmas if ordered after the 12th. I click the continue button, it goes grey with a message like "please wait", and then just resets the page.
Edit: oops, wrong Battletech thread, sorry.
Edit 2: well, now it's working okay. I have no idea what changed, but at least it went away.
Always felt like ProtoMechs were an amazing idea that should have been expanded on further. They make way more sense as a technology, especially with the smaller scale.
Always felt like ProtoMechs were an amazing idea that should have been expanded on further. They make way more sense as a technology, especially with the smaller scale.
I think they could have been amazing if they didn't look so... so...
Then the monkey paw curled and EA picked up the exclusive rights.
It used to belong to Activision, back when they were cool. Y'know, the 90s. REMEMBER THE 90s YOU GUYS?!
I read that is now considered the oldies.
It's literally 30 years ago.
What's the Battletech version of turning to dust? Piloting an Orion?
Piloting a Spider?
Naw, the "Live Fast Die Young" demographic pilots Spiders.
Pretty sure the "Turning to dust" demographic are those MechWarriors still piloting their family's ancestral Unseen, held together by bailing wire and duct tape.
Here I figured you would say piloting a quad mech.
Ok but quad mechs are inherently superior to bipedal mechs but also inferior to tanks the size of mechs because bipedal mechs are actually incredibly dumb in so many ways not that I care because bipedal mechs are fuckin' awesome and there we go entire argument done and over with.
Nah. Bipedal mechs have a lot of advantages over tanks and quad mechs.
They work on uneven ground.
Mountain goats say hi?
Are we just going to ignore the scale of mass and weight involved? Like, people are talking about bipedal mechs being more agile but if you put that much weight onto such a small surface area I'm not convinced that mechs don't just sink into most terrain, particularly the urban ones that people hilariously think will provide some kind of cover.
Also mechs are absurdly light for their size. For example an M1A1 Abrams weighs over 67 tons. Compare the size of that to a Rifleman which only weighs 60 tons.
Again mechs are cool and I love them but they have no basis in reality. With anything more than a casual examination the entire concept falls apart.
But who cares because giant stompy robots are awesome
+14
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
Maybe they were weighed on planets with lighter gravity.
0
Options
H3KnucklesBut we decide which is rightand which is an illusion.Registered Userregular
I thought tons measure mass, which isn't affected by gravity?
I thought tons measure mass, which isn't affected by gravity?
Tons are a measure of pounds, and pounds are definitely a measure of weight and not mass. Something that weighs a ton on Earth weighs something over 300 pounds on the moon, but would be the same number of kilograms.
One thing to remember is that Battlemechs are stated to be around 12 meters tall, but video games and some of the pictures tend to display them as much larger, while fluff tends to downplay their size a bit (MWO is notoriously bad with this, as are most of the sketches of mechs in the various books).
I found this (uncertain of the original source, sorry) while digging around, and it has some interesting size comparisons for the Clan Invasion Omnis:
+7
Options
H3KnucklesBut we decide which is rightand which is an illusion.Registered Userregular
I thought tons measure mass, which isn't affected by gravity?
Tons are a measure of pounds, and pounds are definitely a measure of weight and not mass. Something that weighs a ton on Earth weighs something over 300 pounds on the moon, but would be the same number of kilograms.
That's short tons, though. Are you sure Battletech isn't using metric tons?
I thought tons measure mass, which isn't affected by gravity?
Tons are a measure of pounds, and pounds are definitely a measure of weight and not mass. Something that weighs a ton on Earth weighs something over 300 pounds on the moon, but would be the same number of kilograms.
That's short tons, though. Are you sure Battletech isn't using metric tons?
My mistake, I thought you were referring to tons in general. I would think Battletech is using metric tons, but I dunno why they wouldn't use "tonnes" instead (which specifically refers to metric tons) except for it maybe being a US convention and nobody else bothers with it because hardly any other countries are dumb enough to keep using the fuckawful Imperial measurement system.
Always felt like ProtoMechs were an amazing idea that should have been expanded on further. They make way more sense as a technology, especially with the smaller scale.
I think they could have been amazing if they didn't look so... so...
Always felt like ProtoMechs were an amazing idea that should have been expanded on further. They make way more sense as a technology, especially with the smaller scale.
I think they could have been amazing if they didn't look so... so...
Yeah... that.
Thing is, most of the mechs from that era have bad design/art. Like, maybe people find them nostalgic, but fuck are many of them unappealing. As someone who looks at the Corsair and goes "look at that ugly beast, I want it to ride that plow on legs!" I can tell you I'd never pick up an Ice Ferret, it's too shitty looking even for me.
Always felt like ProtoMechs were an amazing idea that should have been expanded on further. They make way more sense as a technology, especially with the smaller scale.
I think they could have been amazing if they didn't look so... so...
Yeah... that.
Thing is, most of the mechs from that era have bad design/art. Like, maybe people find them nostalgic, but fuck are many of them unappealing. As someone who looks at the Corsair and goes "look at that ugly beast, I want it to ride that plow on legs!" I can tell you I'd never pick up an Ice Ferret, it's too shitty looking even for me.
Yeah, the few times I'd try to look up something on a mech on the HBS Battletech wiki and see some old art of that mech on the way, I'd be surprised at how goofy they'd look. Like, a Jenner isn't the most imposing looking mech, but it's not as goofy as this:
I think they're actually onto something those protomech designs. Like execution needs work obviously, but I think there's something to the idea of monstrous-looking mechs.
Let's not forget the Leggy Catapult in that classic "falling backwards" pose.
+3
Options
NipsHe/HimLuxuriating in existential crisis.Registered Userregular
A while back Matt Plog was commissioned by someone to draw updated, "production" variants of all the Protomechs that toned down the fantasy look of them. They're across the board baller AF, and I wish I had the talent to 3D sculpt them into miniatures.
Spoiler'd for fuckoff huge images.
Centaur
Orc
Procyon
Basilisk
Delphyne
Siren
Roc
Minotaur (I kinda miss the horns on this one)
Gorgon
Erinyes
Cecerops
+16
Options
OrcaAlso known as EspressosaurusWrexRegistered Userregular
I had to go look up what Protomechs were... They really are interesting. Here I was imagining the Transformers Pretenders for some strange reason where they hid a mech inside an organic body (which would be silly since it would be a human, inside a mech, inside an organic body).
I had to go look up what Protomechs were... They really are interesting. Here I was imagining the Transformers Pretenders for some strange reason where they hid a mech inside an organic body (which would be silly since it would be a human, inside a mech, inside an organic body).
KayWhat we need...Is a little bit of PANIC.Registered Userregular
Protomechs were sub-10 ton mechs designed to look like fantastical creatures for intimidation purposes or something. The originally just looked silly, but those redesigns are really NICE.
Tanks can take cover as well, even if they can't like, hunch down. They're generally better at taking cover than a mech of equivalent mass, due to their lower profile.
If the cover is set up for them yes... but also no. Mechs can lay down (well not all of them but many)
Battlemechs are not feasible warfare devices as they are presented in the game, for many reasons, including the fact that all this time and energy put into making it walk up right, carry weapons and whatnot, and then put armor on it, is going to lose to a squat compact vehicle with more armor and bigger weapons, built cheaper, and much much sturdier. Tanks are easy to kill in battletech because it is a game. In reality, a mech would go down pretty damn easily.
Also real life tanks can shoot ( and see) through walls, sand dunes, etc, cover...isn't really a thing. From like 3km away to boot.
All of this would lose to over the horizon missle spam anyway, Battletech had to specifically invent a reason why this tech went away in the future because it would be the answer to everything.
There would probably be a place for small bipedal mechas, but it wont be anywhere near Battletech's size, they wont be the main armament, and they would lose straight up to a tank battalion every time.
Real life tanks cannot see and shoot through sand dunes and definitely not from 3km... And walls are semi-effective cover even if it’s one use for the same reason that windows are semi-effective cover against bullets.
Over the horizon missile spam would... probably not be effective unless you were not planning on having anything living in the area. For a variety of reasons. Countermeasures exist and seeing over the horizon is only really possible with satellites (which would be first to go) and is kind of necessary because it’s difficult to understate just how large land is. Like... you would just shoot the missiles with lasers
The American M1 Abrams' M256 120-millimeter smoothbore gun has a maximum effective range between 3 km (1.86 miles) and 4 km (2.48 miles).
There have absolutely been reports of m1a1 shooting through sand dunes to destroy russian built tanks (I forget the designation) during the gulf war. They can use thermal vision to see heat signatures through walls and other stationary objects, as well as other sensing devices. The rounds these tanks use have depleted urianium tips of such density a regular concrete wall would be about as useful as tissue paper.
Tanks aren't obsolete tech they are the kings of the battlefield for a reason.
Over the horizon engagement is the current state of combat in the world today. There is no reason why this would change. If anything it would get worse. Especially given the orbital capabilities, most mech engagements would be endable with pinpoint orbital bombardment from space. It wouldn't have to be apocalyptic either, im not talking rods from god here. You can get from orbit to the ground very quickly, and at that height, there's no way to get away in time. The ordinance would simply be able to adjust its flight path for the minuscule distance you could reach, and it would be targetting you from above the entire time. The only reason we don't really try to go for this shit now is the cost involved in getting up there, but in this world, they can pick up 400 tons of battle mech and get them back up to space easily.
Like, I know you like mechs but I'm sorry real world military tech is fuckin terrifying and it's only going to get worse, with automated battle machines coming soon. Nevermind that something as large as a battle mech wouldn't survive on a battlefield, it wouldn't even have a human pilot. The best case use (and a viable one) is a small elemental sized bipedal thing, that bridges the gap between infantry and tanks. They wouldn't have much armament, but they'd be much more mobile, especially in an urban environment. Big stompy robots are never going to happen. Small zippy ones, while more boring, could probably work, which is why they're still trying to make them. Although currently since bipedal motion is quite hard, they're going more for quad robots.
Just, enjoy your games dude. Don't try to realify this. It doesn't work.
Nah. The value of ground vehicles is that they’re resistant to infantry. Tanks aren’t obsolete because they’re kings of the battlefield they’re not obsolete because you must have boots on the ground and those boots need support and also lose to tanks. Geek out about their guns all you want, but a plane can cross their effective range is 10 seconds and drop a missile that will hit them from twice the range of the tanks cannons.
As a result what matters is armor to withstand infantry attacks and weaponry to fight its equivalent.
In a world where bipedal mechs are possible they’re going to have the same targeting and weapons capability as a tank, but they have all the other advantages of a human does. The ability to modify their profile to fit the situation. The ability to articulate their weapons to find optimal defilade regardless of terrain... The ability to modify terrain without the aid of infantry thus limiting critical infantry exposure.
It’s true that in reality we will probably have bipedal infantry first. But this isn’t because bipedal tanks are a bad idea, it’s because we don’t have the technology to allow them to stand and move at reasonable speeds.
I feel like at that point you are going to be better off with something like Terminator armor or fallout power armor on the small end or heavy gears on the large end.
Like I can see an argument for bipedal armor that can carry heavier weapons than a man, but I don’t see the point in scaling it up to 30-50 foot mechs.
+3
Options
Inquisitor772 x Penny Arcade Fight Club ChampionA fixed point in space and timeRegistered Userregular
No you don't understand they are articulated so you can hide and move and stuff. Anything human-shaped is inherently superior regardless of scale.
The redesigned Roc with that camo pattern looks like it needs to have the Star Spangled Banner playing while rockets explode behind it.
It comes with a loudspeaker that plays "'Murica! FUCK YEAH!" on a loop.
I don't know if anybody in Battletech times really remembers what Murica was. But the song gets them all pumped.
Anybody else really love when this thread gets into dunking on obscure and goofy mech designs?
Makes my day. Hope we get some Quad-Vees up in here soon.
+4
Options
NipsHe/HimLuxuriating in existential crisis.Registered Userregular
edited December 2020
Speak, and you shall be answered!
Honestly my only problem with Quadvees is that inevitably one of their two forms looks goofy. Either the 'Mech looks good but the Tank looks blech, or vice versa. I just looked at all the canon ones and they run afoul of this without fail.
The coolest looking one, IMO, is the Boreas. Extra points are awarded for being its own rolling light show, by incorporating Laser Heat Sinks.
A while back Matt Plog was commissioned by someone to draw updated, "production" variants of all the Protomechs that toned down the fantasy look of them. They're across the board baller AF, and I wish I had the talent to 3D sculpt them into miniatures.
Spoiler'd for fuckoff huge images.
Delphyne
I feel like the Delphyne redesign kind of gave up entirely on the whole "Robot Dragon" theme, just a little bit.
Honestly my only problem with Quadvees is that inevitably one of their two forms looks goofy. Either the 'Mech looks good but the Tank looks blech, or vice versa. I just looked at all the canon ones and they run afoul of this without fail.
The coolest looking one, IMO, is the Boreas. Extra points are awarded for being its own rolling light show, by incorporating Laser Heat Sinks.
Mech form still looks goofy, though.
That looks way too close to Transformers Hardhead...
I couldn't reach my Titans Returns Hardhead but got Quake to make a similar pose.
Posts
You can have a lance of mechs riding around in their dropship with basically just repairs and ammo supplies to worry about. They've got effectively infinite range. Tanks a great, but they can only drive out so far from their base/dropship before you have to either refuel them or carry them around again. Mechs you can just drop off in the mountains and let them crawl around for months at a time if you need to.
Omni mechs go even farther in terms of streamlining logistics.
...and why can't you use the same tech for tanks as you do for your mecha? Don't neglect repairs, they're a huge part of keeping an armored unit anything except an extremely expensive pillbox.
What is stopping someone from putting the same fusion engine into a tank-shaped package instead of a giant bipedal mech?
Articulation is diametrically opposed to armoring though. You're better off just being smaller and mounting less armor to greater effect. A smaller target is always better, all else being equal. Aside from ground pressure concerns. Knocked over buildings are difficult for even human beings to navigate; what do you think something with a higher ground pressure is going to do? A tank is just armor, a power plant, a gun, ammunition storage, and a drivetrain with enough space for a human crew crammed into it. Just the turret alone is a huge compromise in terms of complexity and durability vs. flexibility. What does adding a vastly more complicated, more vulnerable, and heavier drivetrain and turret (arms) add that makes it worth the cost? It isn't like air power where there is a radically new capability that trumps all. It's just a new and different tank in a different form factor.
Unless you're talking about technology that is so advanced the tank is reconfiguring its armor surfaces in realtime to present the sharpest possible angle to any threats in the vicinity, and has support structures with enough rigidity that can work, and at that point it's still not really mecha. It's a different kind of cool though.
Why do we ever make things more complicated? A: because they're better.
I can dig it. Mans gotta have dreams.
I'm not interested in continuing this argument tho, it's starting to get circular. We'll find out if they ever make them.
There is one particular scene from an anime involving mecha I wanted to bring up tho because I thought it was a really neat touch. It's from the light novel of full metal panic (way past any of the anime).
There's a scene where there's a few mechs and they are facing a tank battalion on open ground. And it's pretty much straight up stated that the mechs are going to lose in this situation, so they had to bend over backwards to try and make things favourable. I can't remember how that battle ended but the tanks were straight up presented as "we are fucked now".
I thought that was particularly cool.
Mountain goats say hi?
Quads would be much better than bipeds on uneven ground. Whether they're structured like ungulates, carnivora, lizards, arthropods, or walking turrets, all of those can mountain climb very well.
Are we just going to ignore the scale of mass and weight involved? Like, people are talking about bipedal mechs being more agile but if you put that much weight onto such a small surface area I'm not convinced that mechs don't just sink into most terrain, particularly the urban ones that people hilariously think will provide some kind of cover.
Edit: oops, wrong Battletech thread, sorry.
Edit 2: well, now it's working okay. I have no idea what changed, but at least it went away.
I think they could have been amazing if they didn't look so... so...
Yeah... that.
Also mechs are absurdly light for their size. For example an M1A1 Abrams weighs over 67 tons. Compare the size of that to a Rifleman which only weighs 60 tons.
Again mechs are cool and I love them but they have no basis in reality. With anything more than a casual examination the entire concept falls apart.
But who cares because giant stompy robots are awesome
Tons are a measure of pounds, and pounds are definitely a measure of weight and not mass. Something that weighs a ton on Earth weighs something over 300 pounds on the moon, but would be the same number of kilograms.
I found this (uncertain of the original source, sorry) while digging around, and it has some interesting size comparisons for the Clan Invasion Omnis:
That's short tons, though. Are you sure Battletech isn't using metric tons?
My mistake, I thought you were referring to tons in general. I would think Battletech is using metric tons, but I dunno why they wouldn't use "tonnes" instead (which specifically refers to metric tons) except for it maybe being a US convention and nobody else bothers with it because hardly any other countries are dumb enough to keep using the fuckawful Imperial measurement system.
The Minotaur and the Roc aren't too bad looking!
I think they're actually onto something those protomech designs. Like execution needs work obviously, but I think there's something to the idea of monstrous-looking mechs.
3DS FCode: 1993-7512-8991
3DS FCode: 1993-7512-8991
Spoiler'd for fuckoff huge images.
Orc
Procyon
Basilisk
Delphyne
Siren
Roc
Minotaur (I kinda miss the horns on this one)
Gorgon
Erinyes
Cecerops
edit: I don't have one
but now I want one
Steam: betsuni7
3DS FCode: 1993-7512-8991
I feel like at that point you are going to be better off with something like Terminator armor or fallout power armor on the small end or heavy gears on the large end.
Like I can see an argument for bipedal armor that can carry heavier weapons than a man, but I don’t see the point in scaling it up to 30-50 foot mechs.
It comes with a loudspeaker that plays "'Murica! FUCK YEAH!" on a loop.
I don't know if anybody in Battletech times really remembers what Murica was. But the song gets them all pumped.
Anybody else really love when this thread gets into dunking on obscure and goofy mech designs?
Makes my day. Hope we get some Quad-Vees up in here soon.
Honestly my only problem with Quadvees is that inevitably one of their two forms looks goofy. Either the 'Mech looks good but the Tank looks blech, or vice versa. I just looked at all the canon ones and they run afoul of this without fail.
The coolest looking one, IMO, is the Boreas. Extra points are awarded for being its own rolling light show, by incorporating Laser Heat Sinks.
Mech form still looks goofy, though.
That looks way too close to Transformers Hardhead...
I couldn't reach my Titans Returns Hardhead but got Quake to make a similar pose.
Steam: betsuni7