[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k] [s4s] [vip] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/v/ - Video Games



Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.



File: Titan_and_Pilot.jpg (43 KB, 300x387)
43 KB
43 KB JPG
Why do they use mechs when they are clearly inferior to tanks and IFVs?
>>
>>377416306
>mechs
lol

http://www.mechadamashii.com/news/news-titanfalls-mecha-arent-mecha-apparently/
>>
>>377416306
rule of cool
>>
Because hauling a fusion reactor around allows you to power more weaponry by FAR than one tank can manage. Remember tanks are pretty much an anti-tank cannon and anti-infantry machine guns, your average mech doesn't even consider infantry when it's being designed because every other tank and mech will be firing at it. Having a mech is like having two Queens in chess, the thing is scary, it can move pretty quick across rough ground and it has a vertical perspective of the battlefield- let's face it, it's always better to be shooting down at things.
>>
>>377416306
The most damning reason is that tanks and IFVs are not built for Orbital Drops, and a hydraulic system capable of making orbital drops would already put them halfway towards being mechs anyway.
Plus the fact that this is a universe in which battles are as likely to be ship-to-ship boarding actions in midair or empty space as they are to be fought on the ground. More importantly, space battles are likely the deciding points of large engagements, so armored mechanized units with the dexterity to grab hold and pull themselves into the enemy ship and bypass their armor and shielding are more effective than vehicles that are only meant for ground-based operations.
>>
>>377416306
Because tanks are boring, slow garbage who only ww2 obsessed autists find interesting in the slightest and also tanks cant dodge.
>>
File: ee-t1-osorio.jpg (137 KB, 1000x675)
137 KB
137 KB JPG
>>377418038
That's a lot of subjective words.
>>
>>377416306
semi-autonomous mechs are more polyvalent
>>
>>377416424
>>
File: MWLL 2011-10-20 15-34-26.jpg (273 KB, 1920x1080)
273 KB
273 KB JPG
>not using both
>>
Pros
>vertical firing platform that can use buildings for cover
>able to use a greater variety of weapons with more precision than a tank
>able to perform the same tasks as a human, but scaled-up, so the utility alone is miles better
>can traverse rough terrain better than a tank, and is less likely to be stuck in mud
>can be airdropped from large heights to improve response times
>is fucking cool
Cons
>big target that draws fire, whether it's a more reasonable 5 meter tall mech or something retarded at 10 meters
>useless when a leg is crippled, insurgents could feasibly fight these by laying a tripwire and toppling them into an IED or something
>prohibitively expensive and would need a dedicated team of mechanics in the group to ensure it remains mobile, that many moving parts are guaranteed to be a hassle
>>
>>377418441
My nigga
>>
>>377416306
mechs have hands, hands are needed to use tools

plus all the points huey makes about clearance and shit in phantom pain.

>muh tank can do all the same...
no /k/, no it can't.
>>
>>377419101
>more precision than a tank
>less likely to be stuck in mud

Wrong.
>>
File: 1477260774264.webm (2.91 MB, 900x506)
2.91 MB
2.91 MB WEBM
>>
>>377421052
I love those anime mech vs tanks battles.

They either make the tanks behave completely retarded to show mech supremacy or, like in your webm, make mechs behave completely retarded to appeal to tankfags.
>>
File: 1421819750842.gif (990 KB, 500x375)
990 KB
990 KB GIF
>>377421383
Yeah.
>>
>>377421052
you should post the clip from the other muv luv anime where the tanks do zero damage
>>
Biped mechs will happen but they will be human sized and used for breaching. They could carry all kinds of sensors and a bigg ass shield for your dudes
>>
File: 885.png (701 KB, 600x762)
701 KB
701 KB PNG
>>377418201

>tfw when you are a brazilian and the brazilian army will never use the Osório and instead will use a leopard 1

Why live?
>>
File: atlas.webm (2.82 MB, 853x480)
2.82 MB
2.82 MB WEBM
>>
>>377423094

>tfw all of our politicians are corrupt

dictatorship when
>>
File: ares.webm (2.9 MB, 676x380)
2.9 MB
2.9 MB WEBM
>>
File: chevalier.webm (2.26 MB, 676x380)
2.26 MB
2.26 MB WEBM
>>
File: demolisher.webm (2.42 MB, 853x480)
2.42 MB
2.42 MB WEBM
>>
File: epona.webm (2.33 MB, 484x272)
2.33 MB
2.33 MB WEBM
>>
File: 20170515_134955.jpg (279 KB, 960x1280)
279 KB
279 KB JPG
Think of them like giant, armored diving suits, but instead of being able to withstand the pressures of deep sea, they are built to withstand hostile alien environments, the going to war in them part is just a bonus

Titanfall 1 Titans > Titanfall 2 "press v to win" Titans
>>
>>377423156
game?
>>
>>377423405
>giant, armored diving suits
You mean, nuclear subs?
>>
>>377423156
>>377423248
>>377423290
>>377423345
>>377423395

That's one of the things I always liked about Battletech: tanks, planes, and infantry can fuck up battlemechs and are still heavily used in warfare. It's just that 'mechs are the most versatile of the four.
>>
File: eject.webm (2.3 MB, 676x380)
2.3 MB
2.3 MB WEBM
>>377423545
https://clanjadewolf.net/mwll/
>>
>>377423405
>"press v to win"
In Northstar's case it's 'Press V to die' unless you have the jump on them/big life lead.
>>
>>377417446
The russians can airdrop tanks muh nigga.
also in reality that mech would smash on the ground would be a wreck
>>
>>377423208

Military dictadorship 2018.
Castelo Branco did nothing wrong
>>
>>377418038
lol infatryman detected. keep on crying operation meatshield
>>
Better maneuverability in uneven terrain. That's really the only thing I can come up with.
>>
>>377417446
If you're spending the energy to launch mechs the distances at which space combat would take place, it might just make more sense to use the energy to launch munitions instead.
>>
>>377416856
If you have mobile fusion reactor technology you could very easily attach the same amount, if not more weaponry to a tank chassis and have a 100x more reliable vehicle that isn't covered in massive fucking weak points in all its joints.
Not to mention the massive clusterfuck of having to deal with the sheer amount of pressure two massively heavy legs would produce. Can you imagine trying to move through sand, snow or most of all, fucking mud when you have 5x the weight of a tank all focused on two long, thin hunks of metal?
Plus, all those fucking flat surfaces are just begging to be goddamn annihilated by any kind of armor penetrating munition. Tanks are flat and either sloped or angled for a reason.

I like mechs, they look fucking cool in anime and video games, I still play Armored Core all the time. Bu if anyone ever thinks a tank-sized humanoid robot could be feasible IRL either has 0 knowledge of physics or is a massive fucking weeb.
>>
>>377416424
God I hope this faggot lost his job
>>
>>377419101
>vertical firing platform that can use buildings for cover
so just a bigger target
>able to use a greater variety of weapons with more precision than a tank
you can mount a ton more shit on a 70 ton tank than a 70 ton bipedal machine
>can traverse rough terrain better than a tank, and is less likely to be stuck in mud
more likely to get stuck on mud*
>can be airdropped from large heights to improve response times
if you can put a big enough parachute on a 70 ton mech you can put the same parachute on a tank
>>
>>377416306
bipedal war vehicles actually make sense in none urban, uncivilized combat zones where roads don´t exit like dessert or jungles since legs can easier move in those environments instead of wheels which get easily stuck and can´t move over certain obstacles
>>
File: Rule of Cool.jpg (99 KB, 640x1442)
99 KB
99 KB JPG
>>377416306
>>
>yfw we are edging ever closer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q04Jt3Zux7A
>>
>>377424529
Fuck anon I wish somebody would have already thought about something to replace wheel based
weapon platforms.
>>
Because it's an FPS and nobody wants Resident Evil tank controls.
>>
>>377424768
That still can't scale a 90 degree cliff face
>>
>>377424075
And yet regardless, mechs are still superior. Tanks have plenty, if not MORE weak points and yet nobody ever complains about that.
Checkmate, /k/.
>If you have mobile fusion reactor technology you could very easily attach the same amount, if not more weaponry to a tank chassis and have a 100x more reliable vehicle that isn't covered in massive fucking weak points in all its joints.
No you couldn't.
>>
>>377424878
Put on the kind of jets a mech would have for vertical maneuvering. You'd pretty much have the starfox landmaster with better weaponry.
>>
>>377424878
Do you really believe mechs can scale a 90 degree cliff?
>>
>>377418441
>>377423156
>>377423248
>>377423290
>>377423345
>>377423395
>>377423682
Nigger of mine as well
>>
>>377424768
technology simply isn´t there jet so people still use wheels but one day it will be possible to do technically speaking and then the switch will happen.
I especially talking about smaller based drones. Just try to imagine small wheel based robots trying to move through a forest full of slopes and fallen over trees. the would move much slower then an actual human.
that is also why that bostom dynamics robot also has legs. it´s simply more flexible
>>
>>377424878
There are so many 90 degrees cliff faces in warfare that we need to invest billions of dollars and make our vehicle an easy big target just to get over them.
>>
>>377424075
>WHY WOULD YOU WALK AROUND WHEN YOU CAN CRAWL ON ALL 4S AND HAVE TWICE AS MANY LEGS!??!?!
>CHECK MATE HOMINIDS!!!!
you're a fucking sperg and retarded. Shut up.
>>
What are some games that let me murder tanks with mechs?
>>377425071
Not him but that's still better than a tank.
>>
>>377424989
If it is low enough for it to step on it, then yeah. Think of it like taking a step on a set of stairs. The tank is instantly fucked when there's a cliff that exceeds the height of the treads.
>>
>>377425052
I agree on small scale but replacing tanks in the current military doctrine with mechs is just stupid.
>>
>>377420009
>>377424403
A bipedal mech could always use it's arms to pull itself free form mud, and another mech can help without any specialized tools.

An Abrams can do shit if it's stuck, and another wheeled/tracked vehicle can do shit to help.

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

I don't advocate big mechs though, battlesuits have all their pros but without any of their cons
>>
>>377416306
tanks actually require a well trained group to operate.
they cool thing about the titanfall mechs is that they are just upscalled soldiers which copy all the movements of it´s piolet which means that 1 person can operate it and be much faster in performing it´s moves then a tank crew
>>
File: 3717489.jpg (24 KB, 350x400)
24 KB
24 KB JPG
>>377424939
>Nuh-uh!
>>
>>377424878
You don't need a vehicle that does everything you dummy, combined arms is a thing.
>>
File: tank-flip.jpg (52 KB, 610x457)
52 KB
52 KB JPG
>>377425257
Yeah, why bring wolves to war when you can have turtles?
>>
File: SFZ_Gravmaster.png (1.03 MB, 1600x1169)
1.03 MB
1.03 MB PNG
>>377424971
Would a tank capable of vertical maneuverability be a logical thing in a sci-fi universe? I'd imagine flying tanks would be more useful than mechs.
>>
>>377425257
tanks are already stupid in an age of stealth bombers, guided missiles and war helicopters
>>
>>377425270
>A bipedal mech could always use it's arms to pull itself free form mud
By grabbing on all the mud around?
>>
>>377425368
You see, the wheel-based platform is always superior!
>>
>>377425358
That's what you were saying though.
>>
>>377425446
by performing set of movements that a human would normally do to get out of mud
>>
>>377425361
>Tank has to circle around or simply just find another way while infantry squad painstakingly climbs the cliff face, both up and down
vs
>Infantry squad gets on the mech and it steps up to the plateau and down on the other side and places the squad down
>>
File: 34374-tanks-oops-001.jpg (121 KB, 800x597)
121 KB
121 KB JPG
>>377425446
Good thing you've never fallen down before, or a retard like you would be completely and utterly fucked for life.

Meanwhile, the rest of us manage to get up and not die every time we slip in a puddle.
>>
>>377425368
>>377425502
You know that robot falls more than tanks ever flip right?
>>
>>377425440
And mechs are just taller tanks,what's your point?
>>
>>377425446
I don't think you even understand why mud is bad for vehicles but less bad for bipedals

It's not without a bottom, a taller mech would find traction where a tank would just spin it's treads. Besides, if there's mud, there's usually trees to grab too.
>>
File: 82302218.jpg (40 KB, 456x400)
40 KB
40 KB JPG
>>377425579
Yes.

Now read
>>377425572
>>
>>377425589
that both big mechs and tanks won´t be used in future warfares
>>
>>377423682
>https://clanjadewolf.net/mwll/
is it still played?
>>
>>377425517
Humans don't weigh tons.
>>
>>377425719
Humans also aren't talk enough to reach the bottom of the mud.
>>
>>377425702
The desirability of big, mobile guns on the ground will go nowhere. Unless you figure that in the future, nanobots will find the hostiles and eat them from the inside out faster than artillery can, or something like that.
>>
File: 1480538605129.png (26 KB, 510x546)
26 KB
26 KB PNG
>>377416424
Oh Jesus Christ shut up about this old news. The guy just had a perception of what he thought mechs were and didn't fully understand, and later retracted that statement.
>>
>>377425572
>Implying mechs won't break when they fall face first to the ground
>>
>>377425719
they are also not the size of a building
>>
>>377425162
>Greentexting in all caps
>spewing memes
>ur a sperg bro

It's a shame you're too autistic to understand irony, but I got a giggle out of this.
>>
File: hippo-mud-fight.jpg (203 KB, 1200x798)
203 KB
203 KB JPG
>>377425719
So
Fucking
What?
>>
>>377425712
yup, it's active most of the day and was patched in the past week
>>
>>377425839
Oh fuck, I forgot hippos are bipeds.
>>
>>377422752
Gazaraki is such a gem.
>>
File: 1401810013564.jpg (1.43 MB, 2284x1504)
1.43 MB
1.43 MB JPG
This is the M2 heavy machine gun, affectionately known as ma deuce, it spits fist sized projectiles at supersonic speeds that can reach over 2 miles away, say goodbye to all your weakjoints and vulnerable points mechfags.
>>
File: IZ.png (152 KB, 471x384)
152 KB
152 KB PNG
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=De2SuYAjrdY
>>
>>377425775
don´t have to be nanobots. fly sized drones that shoot mini bullets will do just fine. any big scale destruction will be performed by guided missiles or drone bombers
>>
>>377425816
I don't suffer from aspergers, but the idiot that has an entire notebook full of reasons why mechs wouldn't work in real life, and 90% of those reasons don't reflect real life, definitely does.

Perhaps you should flesh out your understanding of greentext a little further before you yank your dick like that again.
>>
>>377425270
>without any specialized tools
Like a rope?
>>
MechAssult > MechWarrior
>>
>>377425506
>Giant robots a real!
>Uh-uh!
>No you!

Am I in kindergarten again?
>>
>>377425934
They sure as fuck don't have wheels or treads. Can you even follow a thought for more than one second before responding in the stupidest way possible, or is it compulsive?
>>
File: 1375295910473.jpg (20 KB, 278x323)
20 KB
20 KB JPG
>>377416306

A fully equipped modern soldier vs a dog sized tank.

Who wins?
>>
File: 1410745399207.jpg (491 KB, 1024x683)
491 KB
491 KB JPG
Oh hi there mechfag, I'm just here caping your huge ass from 4 miles away while in complete stealth.
>>
What makes a mech like a titan appealing is how absolutely dexterous and versatile it would be, basically. It's probably not going to beat tanks 1v1, but an enlarged human body is just about the most intuitive weapons system you could have.

You could punch through a building in just the right places, transport heavy equipment quickly, swap weapons for situations on the fly as they're in essence enlarged infantry weapons. It'd be a jack of all trades. The fatal flaw, of course, is that unless you have future space magic the armor would have to be far more thin than a tank.
>>
>>377425962
>Invader Zim
nuMale detected
>>
>>377426126
Well if they aren't bipeds,don't have wheels or treads why did you bring them up in a talk about tanks vs mechs?
>>
>>377425952
In Brigador you can strap two of those on a lightweight mech and run around like a headless chicken picking fights with huge enemy mechs made out of scrap, high-tech mechs and mobile battle fortresses the size of a 6 story building with triple railguns (don't get hit by those).
>>
>>377426117
>Thinking tanks are superior at all
I don't know, am I?
>>
>>377426321
P.S.: if you really hate mechs, you can strap them to a small tank (the only dual Turret hardpoint tank is basically a technical, though) or agrav.
>>
>>377426261
See if you can figure it out.

Arms can function like extra-dexterous legs, you fucking retard.
>>
>>377426029
It's something anyone with even a rudimentary grasp on physics would understand.

I'm gonna go ahead and keep assuming the guy arguing the validity of giant anime robots against proven, real world technology and trying to instruct me on proper greentext etiquette is the autist here.
>>
>>377426462
>Arms can function like extra-dexterous legs.
How often do you walk on your arms anon?
>>
File: apilas.jpg (44 KB, 550x328)
44 KB
44 KB JPG
>>377425952
This is the APILAS portable one-shot 112 mm recoilless anti-tank weapon. It spits a 3 pound shaped charge projectile that can penetrate 720 mm RHAe or 2 m of concrete.

Say goodbye to your whole tank, tankfags
>>
>>377416306
The Titan is a sentient AI that connects with the pilot through a neural link, so presumably the human brain is best able to control a humanoid body since that's what the existing infrastructure is for.

In-universe, the apparent benefits of faster reaction time and greater precision while piloting apparently make up for the fact it's a biped frame.

Pilots are also equipped with jetpacks and in campaign your titan throws you really fucking far on multiple occasions in order to get over impassable terrain or flank.

Being higher up and with limbs that can stomp or crush enemy Pilots is also an advantage, since in-game it would be fucking trivial to rodeo tanks as a 60kph pilot.

Also giant robots are cool
>>
>>377426626
Who let a filthy fucking legger in here?
>>
>>377426626
Whenever I'm climbing on your mom
>>
File: 1490033379530.jpg (31 KB, 683x470)
31 KB
31 KB JPG
>>377426186
Why would a huge ass need a cape for?
>>
>>377425787
When it's your job to sell a genre game and you don't even know what the genre is, you deserve to get shit on.
>>
>>377426393
>Thinking something that has proven to massively fuck people up in actual combat is superior to something physically impossible that only exists in fiction and your imagination

You're right, I've been such a child!
>>
>>377426831
So you're saying that horses can defeat jetfighters because horses existed in a time when jetfighters didn't, therefore there was never any reason to develop jetfighters?
>>
File: 1479284902071.png (303 KB, 819x768)
303 KB
303 KB PNG
>>377426779
Not really. It was an honest mistake.
>>
>>377427010
Not really, this developer has voiced open disdain for the actual mech genre since before the first game came out. Fuck em.
>>
>>377416306
Mechs can have better mobility; Jumping, flying and being harder to hit.
>>
>>377427162
Mech genre is kinda shit anyways 2bh
>>
>>377427175
Also everything is inferior to drones and smart weapons.
>>
>>377427228
>2b
2B isn't a mech!
>>
>>377427162
>Using statements made years ago that are no longer relevant
Okay, I guess. Doesn't really make the games worse like people want to believe because one guy said something they didn't like.
>>
>>377427384
Nah, the game doesn't need any statements from the developers to make it look bad, it manages to be complete shit all on it's own.
>>
File: the skies are mine.webm (2.84 MB, 1280x720)
2.84 MB
2.84 MB WEBM
>>377416306
can fly

>>377423405
what a bunch of Titanfall 2 noobs. You think people will just stand still and let you core them to death?

>>377423712
And do YOU know how to quadruple Northstar's flight speed with air strafing? Besides, you need a good position for every core. Otherwise you either waste it or get killed while you can't move. Except salvo lol.

>>377423682
Wow. I've played a lot of old mech games, but I never knew that Mechwarrior was THIS similar to Titanfall.

>>377426198
On the loading screen of Homestead, Titans are shown being used as farm tools. It seems they are used for all sorts of other jobs.
>>
>>377423936
Probably, if the goal is to just keep hammering get each other until somebody goes down. However, in Titanfall the big bad is a giant corporation; it's not that big of a stretch to believe that early on in the conflict, capturing or disabling enemy ships was higher priority, especially since a lot of Militia ships were actually stolen from the corporation. Conversely, the Militia would want to capture enemy ships in order to bolster their lacking fleet.
As another point, mechs are far more equipped to deal with countermeasures like intercept-missiles and point-defense than any cost-effective missile, can cause far more damage when they get aboard, and can then be retrieved and used again.
>>
>>377427487
>can fly

I don't see why can giant-ass robots can fly but tanks can't.
>>
File: Chef Phase.gif (2.03 MB, 540x540)
2.03 MB
2.03 MB GIF
>>377427472
Oh okay, so you never played either games. Cool.
>>
>>377426610
Your argument is "physics"?

Is that your final answer, dumbshit? That better not be your final answer, because "physics" isn't the problem. We can physically build mechs. The problem is energy logistics. Batteries aren't up to snuff yet and combustion engines just really don't gel well enough with the concept.
>>
>>377427674
>We can physically build mechs.

But can these mechs perform like in video games?
>>
>>377427650
While you're making the tank fly, why not add arms and legs to help it land without trashing the treads? Oh shit, because then it would be a mech.
>>
>>377426945
No, because a jet fighter makes perfect sense if you understand physics and aerodynamics.

You're assuming that some unknown future technology will make moving a several hundred ton humanoid robot quickly and dexterously, but going by that assumption you could likely put the same technology into an updated tank design and it would be smaller, easier to maintain, cheaper and have just as potent weaponry.

There is no combat scenario in which taking a tank, putting joints on it and raising it 40+ feet into the air makes any kind of sense.
>>
MW:LL is so fucking good.

It's a damn shame it didn't get more popular.
>>
>>377427668
I played the first, and it was shit. I'd be an idiot to get baited twice.
>>
File: honorable death.webm (2.97 MB, 1280x720)
2.97 MB
2.97 MB WEBM
>>377428372
eject from life
>>
>>377427867
Thank you armchair physicist/strategic mastermind for your input, but you're fucking stupid. You don't know much about physics and you apparently know nothing about mixed unit tactics.

I'm guessing your entire understanding of how an 8-ton fighter jet flies is "it goes really fast and it has an airfoil!" and you would spend weeks explaining to me that harrier jets couldn't exist if they didn't exist.
>>
>>377427950
Mechfags underestimate the advantages of having a lower profile too much, think about it, human soldiers always go prone when they enter a battle only getting up when they need to move, a tank is always as close to the ground as possible and it can still move and shoot at the same time.
>>
>>377428498
Oh man look at those mechs that are just bigger people, so fun. You can play call of duty, then get in a mech and play slightly bigger call of duty!
>>
>>377428651
>human soldiers always go prone
Really? You mean the guys invading Osama's compound belly-crawled the whole way?
>>
>>377428372
Oh, so you're just a retard shitposting for no reason. Good to know.
>>
File: wallpaper-709578.jpg (929 KB, 1920x1200)
929 KB
929 KB JPG
>>377428652
>knights on horses are just bigger, faster people
>so fun

>people with armor are just bigger people
>>
>>377428821
You sure woo'd me over with those cinematic takedowns and clusterfucked UI. I'm still waiting for you to give any reason why either of those games are good, all you've done is just call me a retard for not liking a bad video game.
>>
>>377427674
>We can physically build mechs
I guess technically? But for the same price you could probably build 10+ tanks
>The problem is energy logistics
No it isn't. Even if you had a generator capable of powering something that massive without making your mech even more comically heavy, you still have the problem of focusing hundreds of tons of weight on two narrow legs.

Something that size would easily bust down into pavement, god forbid you walk over a fuel/sewer pipeline, and outside of urban areas you'd be fucked on any kind of soft surface.
>>
>>377428936
your entire argument of why you don't like a 9/10 game is "it's shit", you fucking hypocritical bitch.
>>
File: Sneaky Scorch.webm (2.97 MB, 720x404)
2.97 MB
2.97 MB WEBM
>>377428936
Nah, you're the type of person that comes here with a bad attitude and can't be convinced no matter how hard someone might try. There's really no point because it'll just be a waste of time.
>>
>>377429002
>Something that size would easily bust down into pavement, god forbid you walk over a fuel/sewer pipeline, and outside of urban areas you'd be fucked on any kind of soft surface.
Which is why planes don't have landing gear, right? Because that sort of thing would never work. The planes would just burrow straight into the earth's core if they had a 3-point landing gear supporting all that weight!
>>
>>377429229
Not only are you responding to the big ruse but you're not even posting good counters to his line of argument.

Post fast EPG gameplay with grapple hook or something.
>>
>>377429332
tbf, it does show how mech battles aren't like footy-shooty Call of Duty. It's more of a straight-up brawl than the glass cannon gameplay that infantry is used to.
>>
File: 1493363372461.jpg (1.5 MB, 4576x1184)
1.5 MB
1.5 MB JPG
>>377428936
you have a point about the UI lol. But the game is awesome, and it is played more like Unreal Tournament than Call of Duty. You need team coordination, high awareness, speed, and constant aggression to win. Passivity and standing still are death sentences. Look, there is no such thing as 'momentum advantage' in CoD.
>>
File: 1493510589017.gif (89 KB, 500x500)
89 KB
89 KB GIF
>>377416306
Because fuck your tanks. A shitty tank can't be my mechanical protector and wife.
>>
File: Gotta go fast.webm (2.96 MB, 900x506)
2.96 MB
2.96 MB WEBM
>>377429332
I haven't been to /tfg/ in awhile, so I don't have too many webms.

>>377429496
And if you're good, you can make a Titan last an entire game. I've done it plenty of times with my bae Northstar.
>>
>>377427285
This is true and why Tankfags and Mech(a)fags need to stick together in hating drones and impersonal combat
>>
>>377429332
he is the type to keep batteries in his rear compartment though
>>
>>377428608
>refute no points
>resort to ad hominem
>making up quotes to argue against

Pathetic.
>>
>>377429656
We miss you familia
Come back
>>
posting fast
>>
>>377427867
>There's no scenario where bipedal makes sense
You know, surfaces like rocky mountains that tanks just will never go on. Rocky Valleys. Forests. Jungles. Space where it could perform robotic labor as well as defense. I mean I could go on. You're just a dumb nigger if you can't see that there are places a tank couldn't possibly go, yes it could go to space but that'd be retarded to put a tank there. You would use a completely different vehicle for that kind of job.
>>
>>377427285
>>377429657
There are so many games with humans fighting robotic enemies when the sad truth is that if we're at the point where sentient AI is a thing, we're at the point where AI could easily have an aimbot. A peak human is going to have trouble beating a single robot in a firefight, even assuming it's a humanoid robot with a gun and not a drone nuking him from orbit.
>>
>>377428743
>only getting up when they need to move
Nice reading skills, also even during movement they will try to assume as low profile as possible. >>377429920
>>
>>377429657
>implying drone tanks and aircraft in coordination with man-sized mechsuits aren't the future of warfare.

Get the fuck out.
>>
>>377430030
>>
>>377427813
>Hey 1969 NASA. I heard you just made a rocket and went to the moon, but can it go to Mars like in my scifi stories? Wow it can't? Guess you'll never do it.
>>
>>377429657
Dude, tank drones.
>>
Hover tanks are more likely to exist than mechs.
>>
File: G8.33 stats.png (776 KB, 1197x1315)
776 KB
776 KB PNG
>>377429920
I haven't played in awhile though, and can't because of no PSN sub
>Used to be really damn good
>If I went back I'd probably be really shit
I'd probably just slow you down
>>
File: alacrity5.webm (2.71 MB, 1280x720)
2.71 MB
2.71 MB WEBM
The grappling hook is only one of the many ways to go fast in this game, but most of the webms include grapple because it looks cool, it yields the highest speed out of any single item (though you can go even faster with a combination of things) and mostly that it is by far /tfg/'s favorite item. Almost all of us use it. And after you get going fast, you can maintain that speed pretty much indefinitely if you're good.
>>
Cool greentext, too bad it doesn't apply or help your arguments. When someone comes in and starts talking and acting like a retard, calling them out on their retardation is perfectly acceptable.

You have no understanding of physics.
You have no understanding of tactics.
Both of which you argued to be the core of why mechs can't/shouldn't exist.

>jetfighter makes perfect sense if you understand physics and aerodynamics
is just utter fucking bullshit. Tell me how a harrier flies without looking it up, motherfucker. Go on, assface shitbugger.

Then you go on to wretch about how mechs shouldn't exist because we could theoretically drop SOME of that stuff into something that rolls around on the ground and gets completely fucked up by stairs or steep inclines. HOLY SHIT. Do you know that tanks and jets exist in the same fucking universe? DID YOU KNOW THAT TANK TACTICS INCLUDE USING INFANTRY AS BACKUP?

No, because you're a stupid fucking moron that thinks he's an authority on something when he doesn't know SHIT about it. Fuck off.

When an argument goes completely over your fucking head, because YOU are fucking retarded, that doesn't take the wind out of the argument -- it means YOU are fucking retarded and need to stop talking, you dumbshit motherfucker.
>>
File: 54647322.jpg (155 KB, 1280x718)
155 KB
155 KB JPG
>>377424075
Don't bother with the fucking weebs tankbro.
>>
>>377430096
And what stops a mecha from assuming a prone/low profile position when it's in firing position?

Your ass around your head?
>>
File: 1492567613318m.jpg (93 KB, 758x1024)
93 KB
93 KB JPG
>>377429920
>>377429632
>ywn a Titan who secretly likes you more than just a pilot and tries to slowly give hints in secret to avoid being branded as deffective
How would you respond? Do you go with it or report and betray your titan for being deffective?
>>
>>377429289
Wheel with mostly horizontal force vs column of steel with mostly downward force.
Good comparison guy.
>>
>>377430070
But my original point was that if you had the technology to make a mech mechanically and physically feasible you'd be able to very easily apply that same tech to a tank that could traverse fucking rocks while still being a fraction of the cost and size while maintaining proven reliability and combat capability.

But instead of refuting that statement, all you've done is resort to name calling and ad hominem, then starting rambling about tanks in space (?)
>You would use a completely different vehicle for that kind of job.

You mean like an aircraft? like what we've been successfully using for nearly 40 years?
>>
>>377424989
I do it all the time in Armored Core.
>>
>>377424529
>instead of wheels which get easily stuck
I'm pretty sure the sheer weight of a mech being focused on 2 points would cause all fucking kinds of issues getting stuck. A mech would never be able to walk over a sewer system or tunel system as it would likely come crashing in due to it's weight being so focused, and as a result, stuck. Soft ground means the mech sinks in, a tank or any other treaded vehicle would easily pass over. I fucking love mechs, but realistically, they're impractical as hell. The only realistic compromise IMO would be a mechs upper torso sitting on tank treads, or possibly a spider-leg sort of system if you absolutely need to have legs on it.
>>
>>377430740
N-no I would never betray my titanfu
>>
File: 4572328.gif (1.55 MB, 374x299)
1.55 MB
1.55 MB GIF
>>377430070
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RbDe5dEu07I
>Muh rough climate n trees!!!

This is where we were a few years ago, the argument is the technological level applied to a tank design is superior in terms of combat.

Fuck off weeb.
>>
>>377426672
that would also destroy a mech though, whats the point?
>>
>>377430593
>Those GL back units
My nigga right here. My brother would make edgy fast sword mechs and those never failed to fucking annihilate him.
>>
File: robocraft11.gif (1.82 MB, 650x366)
1.82 MB
1.82 MB GIF
>>377425431
Check out Robocraft, despite first impressions that game will teach you alot.
>>
>>377416306
Tanks >>> mechs, this is literally not debatable
>>
>>377431218
A mech is a harder to hit target than a tank, provided it is as mobile as vidya tends to depict them as.
>>
>>377430914
>8 complex independent legs with presumably lightly armored joints to allow for greater range of movement

This sounds like a really great way to be universally hated by engineers.
>>
>>377431570
Only included to make anti-caterpillar folk happy, it's not realistic at all, I know.
>>
>>377431552
If you can build a mecha like that, you'd probably be able to build a tank that'd singlehandedly shit on a whole division equipped with ATGMs
>>
>>377431552
Modern tanks aren't exactly slow either though. If we're talking fictional futureshit, I'd imagine they'll be even faster so it's still irrelevant.
>>
>>377431552
>provided it is as mobile as vidya tends to depict them as.

Well, they won't.
>>
>>377431697
A tank could never be as mobile as a bipedal weapons platform. Treads are great for most terrain, but when you literally have legs that can scale, leap and bound around, treads are pretty clumsy in comparison.
>>
>>377431895
If you're sufficiently advanced to build a bipedal mech big enough to carry weapons that can rival an MBT that can quickly scale buildings/cliffs without breaking a sweat, you can most likely just build hover tanks instead
>>
>>377431809
You are the equivalent of the faggot that went "What's this automobile bullshit? We have horses, and they can work as well as offer transportation!"
>>
>>377432074
Negating gravity is a much bigger physics problem than creating a functional mech.
>>
Why don't they just get rid of the legs and put the mech on treads then replace the arms with large guns/cannons?
>>
>>377432110
Do you believe in magic too?
>>
>>377431780
>Hovertech
Anti-gravitational flat designed tank skimmers would be fucking devastating to deal with. See:
>>377431349

The fact remains that a mech despite arguments of speed capability a mech has too many weak points, and maintaining that said speed AND enough firepower to pierce the armor on these hybrid tanks would not be possible unless the mech was of a heavier design to carry the sufficient weaponry but even so you would still have the weaknesses from the connecting joint and cockpit areas, it literally cannot compete. Disagree? Even Japanese game developers acknowledge this for fucks sake.
>>
>>377432269
Also, why not do away with the head, as it's a stupidly big target and make the torso somewhat boxier
>>
>>377432328
No, but I do believe in human ingenuity, while you obviously do not.
>>
>>377432189
If fuel isn't a problem, because of some crazy tech breakthrough, than it is not, mechs regardless of the tech level will always be less sound from a tactical stand point, you can't argue that.
>>
Even "mechs in real life" threads on /m/ don't have this many delusional people.
>>
>>377424939

wait someone is actually arguing mechs are more applicable in real life warfare than tanks?
Is this nigga serious?
>>
>>377432468
>If fuel isn't a problem

If we go into assumption territory, why couldn't we assume that materials that are entirely resistant to conventional weaponry and can withstand forces so great that they allow full range of motion to bipedal battle constructs have also been created?
>>
>>377431552
Mecha definitely won't be mobile thanks to inertia, square cube labs, massive profile, and the need to rely on fucking shitty ass legs for locomotion.
>>
File: 1423061997086.png (508 KB, 1000x1000)
508 KB
508 KB PNG
>>377432390
>Even Japanese game developers acknowledge this for fucks sake.
>>
>>377431895
Realistically, a mech wouldn't be able to do any of this.

>scale
Scale what? The weight of a mech would pull down walls of buildings if it tried to scale them, and pull stone from cliff faces when trying there. It would need very deep anchors to effectively scale anything relevant. Any scenario where the ground is not possible for ground troops generally means you won't be using ground troops, you would use aerial vehicles like helicopters.

>leap and bound around
Not in urban environments unless they are specifically designed for mechs to be sprinting and hopping about. If things aren't designed for it, you will almost immediately see mechs fall through the ground into sewer and tunnel systems, where they will now likely be stuck. Focusing that much weight into at most, two points is a bad idea, and a mech walking means a lot of that weight will be focused into one point quite frequently, they would even struggle on normal dirt terrain as they would have issues sinking and digging very deeply into the ground when moving.

>treads are pretty clumsy in comparison
I don't see how they would be as they spread the weight over a large area not only providing stability for the tank itself, but also reducing stress on the roads and terrain it is passing over.

In the real world, mechs would weigh a shitload, and fiction never really seems to factor this in.
>>
>>377432906
You would have to start a thread with a solid basis for an arguement desu, here it's just a meta clusterfuck.
>>
>>377427175
Any technology you can apply to Mech can be applied FAR MORE EFFICIENTLY on tanks.
>>
>>377432990
Revengance does not fucking count and you know it, try again.
>>
File: 1488078243496.webm (1.55 MB, 852x480)
1.55 MB
1.55 MB WEBM
>so you want a realistic, down to earth show that's completely off the wall and swarming with magic robots?
>>
File: mechafags btfo.jpg (92 KB, 714x592)
92 KB
92 KB JPG
>>377433026
Savage
>>
File: hit_chance_tables.jpg (1.07 MB, 2048x1536)
1.07 MB
1.07 MB JPG
>>377432906
Because the humanoid design is less effective tactically.
>>
File: 1446690353621.jpg (201 KB, 1020x1125)
201 KB
201 KB JPG
>>377433108
>>
>>377425502
>posting Merkava, the shittiest tank ever from the shittiest military in the world
Israel lost a war against fucking Lebanon.
LEBANON.

Israel is WWII Italy tier at the very best.
>>
>>377430070
Applying same technology to Tanks and they would still be superior in traversal, especially with stuff like hovercraft/flight .
>>
Fuck you guys im buying titanfall 2 next week it better be worth it.
PC or PS4?
>>
>>377433163
Based Kojima thought of EVERYTHING
>>
>>377432642
Yes. And he's right.
>>
>>377432390
> anti grav
ok bruv let's keep all this within the realm of possibility yea?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Pi_qp-Wz2U
>>
File: Invasion in June.png (35 KB, 1695x175)
35 KB
35 KB PNG
>>377433280
Now that's just rude
>>
>>377433218
Due to our current materials and know how being insufficient to solve the problems in that design.

If we had something like the Titans from Titanfall, do you really think that tanks would still rule the battlefields?
>>
>>377433149
Guntank in gundam is a piece of shit.
>>
>>377433332
PC is pretty ded at this point, though the revamped match selection process helped a lot. /tfg/ says PS4 is doing alright.
>>
File: Magnet_4.jpg (37 KB, 800x600)
37 KB
37 KB JPG
>>377433423
It's not like it is impossible, just ridiculously inefficient right now
>>
>>377433494
It's an artillery support platform, and it does that job fine.
>>
>>377433439
To Italy' defense they went against a modern nation that time.
You should have posted its Greek or Albanian expeditions.
>>
>>377433026
Are you implying that these are insurmountable problems? That lightweight, yet durable materials couldn't be developed to keep the weight of a mech low enough allow it to do those things?
>>
>>377433026
>>
>>377433494
In The Origin, maybe, in 0079 the Guntank kicks ass left and right and only dies at A Baoa Q along with the Guncannon and the RX-78, not a bad track record.
>>
>>377433479
If we can make something like the Titans from Titanfall, do you really think that tanks wouldn't be even better?
>>
>>377433423
In response to that particular argument, there is enough cherrypicking in this thread anyway.
>>
>>377433706
Not him but no, They'd just be discarded.
>>
File: 2ec.png (572 KB, 600x580)
572 KB
572 KB PNG
>play a mech tabletop
>also features really advanced tanks
>always pick tanks while everyone else uses mechs
>win easily every time
>mfw we stopped playing it because of "shitty balance"
>>
>>377433664
>That lightweight, yet durable materials

Perfect for making tanks
>>
>>377433664
Noww imagine what a modern tank could do with all those technological advances
>>
>>377433280
The war is still going on, technically, and Israeli casualties are much lower than the opponents'.

But I guess losing works well enough for the Jews, look how much territory they have now, must've been all those losses.
>>
>>377433664
Even assuming that whatever unobtanium that you need exists, why would purposefully create a less tactically sound design? flat low profile will always trump an humanoid one.
>>
>>377433664
Those materials would be far more efficient on other war machines and with far less maintenance cost.
>>
>>377433776
Uhuh, now tell us how that actually went down.
>>
>>377433697
A lone fucking Gouf manages to take three of them.
>>
>>377433369
Thanks for the laugh anon.
>>
>>377433767
>wasting advanced technologies on possibly inferior experimental designs instead ofusing them to improve what you already have
Hitler, is that you?
>>
>>377433494
What about Zaku Tank?
>>
>>377433924
And thank you for the laugh at your opinion. Tankfags are a joke.
>>
File: 1493252758550.jpg (237 KB, 1190x567)
237 KB
237 KB JPG
>>377431015
>>
>>377433332
PS4 had a larger player base but PC is more fps friendly, as well having a much easier time going fast and not have no to deal with aim assisted/mini aimbots on console
>>
File: 2 dogs and an iguana.png (216 KB, 393x391)
216 KB
216 KB PNG
>>377427487
>put turbo engine on Legion
>mfw all those Scorches waste their Core thinking they can hit BIG JOE MEAN GREEN
>>
>>377433974
Enjoy seeing tanks picked and thrown around like a ball. Also having the top half ripped off and the people inside being shaken out and falling.
>>
>>377426672
it's almost like anti-armor weapons are anti-armor or something
>>
>>377433908
I don't know what you want to hear but in the game tanks can stay mobile while shooting in all directions with a way larger gun than mechs can carry. They also have better armor and are faster (hover tanks). So it gets pretty one-sided.
>>
>>377434031
If you seriously think he's right, you might be legally retarded.
>>
>>377433850
How is it less tactically sound if it is infinitely more mobile? A bigger profile counts for less when you can simply sidestep projectiles or even hit the deck like a human would.
>>
>>377433664
If such materials can be developed, why not use it in tanks? You now have even faster tanks, which could even potentially have some minor flight/hover capabilities, meaning they can scale most obstacles a tank wouldn't be able to now. Tank tech isn't just going to magically stop progressing if mechs suddenly exist. Plus, you would need some crazy fucking lightweight materials to make mechs not have all those issues, as I could even see the issues persisting with lightweight mechs, as all of the weight is still focused. You would need to reduce the weight down to something like that of a modern car for some of those issues to start going away, and at that point I think we'll be well beyond the need for mechs.

Power armor on the other hand is a lot more likely to be functional than mechs, though it's not even that likely to ever see use as the armor would never be thick enough to make it worth having. Powered exoskeletons are probably the closest thing we will ever see to mechs that the military will use in the real world.
>>
>>377423094
>US, UK, Germany and France are all trying to show their Tanks off to Turkey in a contest to see who's tanks they'd buy
>US and UK tanks get lost despite state of the art GPS navigatation because the French were caught jamming the receivers
>Germany wins every contest
>UK discovers German Tanks were using non-standard ammunition developed exclusively for the contest
>UK also discovers the armour on the German Tanks was completely fake, causing it to ace the speed race with ease

Th..thanks Germany
>>
File: 8592088597_4af54dbab4_b.jpg (391 KB, 1024x590)
391 KB
391 KB JPG
>>377434169
*720 noscopes you through the frontal plating from several miles away*
Nothin personnel... swoloch
>>
>>377434336
Please explain how they are more mobile though. Just because something has legs doesn't automatically mean it will be more mobile.
>>
>>377434169
>implying mechs can get close enough to tanks
>>
>>377434336
>sidestep supersonic projectiles
I didn't know were actually talking about anime here, ok then.
>>
>>377416306
Cause its cool and in their fictional universes they're better than tanks

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WZNecSmRKvw
>>
>>377434336
>when you can simply sidestep projectiles
Heh
>hit the deck like a human would
Double heh
>>
>>377433548
so then cover the entire planet with magnets?
>>
>>377430823
First of all, planes weigh a fraction of the kind of mech you're proposing and second,
>>377429289
Like this guy said, the force is being transferred in line with the wheel and disperses as it rolls down a 300+ yard runway. A mech would be dealing with considerably more force due to its weight, and then has to apply even more force to push off that leg to lift the other.

Listen, when you get to 10th grade and take a physics class/stop treating anime like it's nonfiction this will make a lot more sense.
>>
>>377434336
>or even hit the deck like a human would
That kind of defeats the purpose of having a mech though, and you're not going to sidestep incoming projectiles, they tend to move faster in real life than they do in video games.
>>
small brain: using new advanced light materials to make mechs
normal brain: using new advanced light materials to make better thanks
enormous galaxy-sized brain: using new advanced light materials to make lots of small and disposable flying drones

>>377434169
>being a gunfag
lmao enjoy getting kicked in the dick while you fumble your useless overdesigned piece of junk around
>>
File: 1494389151986.png (1.21 MB, 1060x1536)
1.21 MB
1.21 MB PNG
>can replace whole voice overs with different ones but can't replace one audio file

I just wanted to replace eject alarm with maburabu one.
>>
>>377434518
You do know that most engagement ranges are so large that a projectile fired by a tank (or any other projectile, for that matter) won't just instantly hit, right?

And if they are so close as to make that happen, they probably wouldn't have the tracking capabilities to keep up with the legged mech.
>>
>>377434336
>hit the deck like a human would
Enjoy shattering most of your electronics, damaging your weapons and possibly killing/incapacitating your pilot
>>
File: 1395986539045.jpg (198 KB, 2048x1247)
198 KB
198 KB JPG
mechfags are literal retards, I'm posting tonks.
>>
File: mW0Uzz3.png (1.31 MB, 1366x768)
1.31 MB
1.31 MB PNG
Can't we all get along?
>>377434630
And I think you have the replies reversed friend, I'm on your side
>>
>>377434647
>Being able to take cover defeats the purpose of the mech

U wot
>>
>>377428608
>8-tons
Quite light for a jet fighter
>>
File: Panzerhaubitze Hummel.jpg (66 KB, 800x600)
66 KB
66 KB JPG
>>377434814
>ablative/reactive armor made boxy tanks viable once more
Thank you based bongs
>>
>>377434784
>Still arguing from a current technology standpoint
>>
File: 1368940177919.jpg (526 KB, 2570x1700)
526 KB
526 KB JPG
>>
>>377429289
You know planes are designed to take of and land on runways right? You know how they don't tend to do so well on things that aren't runways? It's because those other things aren't built to have planes land on them. Plus there's the horizontal factor, the force coming in on a landing is very light on the ground, and is very slowly applied, it's not just instantly thrust straight down as a mechs weight would be in taking a single step, you can forget running or leaping.
>>
File: Patria.jpg (204 KB, 1200x609)
204 KB
204 KB JPG
Hey fags, indirect fire installations and aerial drones are the future of warfare. Both tanks and mechs (that won't even see the light of day) will be obsolete.
>>
File: tanks to meet you.png (18 KB, 1581x77)
18 KB
18 KB PNG
>>
File: 1486799334700.jpg (1.46 MB, 1920x1200)
1.46 MB
1.46 MB JPG
>>377424561
This. Who gives a damn about realism when you can have a giant robot punching other giant robots and smushing stupid grunts with your giant robot feet. Also when the mecha is fast and not slow, and also has the votom wheelie legs it's the best.
>>
>>377434873
Why have the need to dive into cover when you can just be in something that's already low profile? Plus I'd imagine the force and weight behind a mech diving would end up getting it stuck in the ground and things more times than not.
>>
>>377435171
Yeah, that's true, but kind of boring to argue about, I guess.
>>
>>377434331
Well you think tanks are better so who's a retard and who isn't is really fucking obvious.
>>
>>377435269
But that something with a low profile does not have the mobility advantages of the mech. The mech can lower its profile, but the tank can't grow legs.
>>
>>377433664
The actual biggest issues are size and cost.

If there was some miracle material like that, you could use it to build a fleet of highly mobile, reliable, low profile and potently armed tanks for the cost of constructing one gigantic mech.

Not to mention how fucking difficult and long the maintenance would be on something of that magnitude, If it took one hit to a joint you'd probably be looking at a layover time of 4-5 months at least before it was functional again.
>>
File: 1480955304541.webm (2.95 MB, 716x480)
2.95 MB
2.95 MB WEBM
>>377435232
Hopefully Tone Prime skis instead of sprints.
>>
>>377416306
Because they're cooler and there are already games with tanks in them.

Also mobility in an off-world frontier?
>>
>>377435171
>That Patria container

Manning that thing seems like it would be the comfiest post known to man.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bNZYuk2dT1Y
>>
File: maxresdefault.jpg (493 KB, 1920x1080)
493 KB
493 KB JPG
>Muh animu robots!

It's a shame the Japanese military wants this, hopefully, they go with the logical decision
>>
>>377434845
Yeah, my bad, mixed em' up.
>>
>>377435531
>Because they're cooler
Wrong
>>
File: 13507510.jpg (224 KB, 1001x709)
224 KB
224 KB JPG
>>377435232
Votoms would be more realistic if they weren't armoured with Cardboard and use Nitroglycerin as fuel
>>
>>377425802
>Mech designed to take tank rounds and stay operational
>broken by a short fall
>???
>>
>>377435379
Please explain these mobility advantages, people keep saying mobility mobility mobility but give no examples.
>>
>>377435612
ATs aren't supposed to replace tanks, they're closer to heavy infantry. They're about as well armored as an IVF.
>>
>>377426626
How the fuck else do you climb up stairs you fucking homo sapien, emphasis on the HOMO
>>
>>377435171
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ab5cCtrtX8w
>>
File: votoms.jpg (45 KB, 390x550)
45 KB
45 KB JPG
>>377435501
I always wanted a Votoms gamemode in Titanfall
>Titans only
>no shields
>Doomed state start
>Unlimited boost
>40mm, Chaingun, Rocket only
>>
>>377433332
why would you even consider playing the fastest paced fps in existence on console
>>
>>377435641
The thread is full of examples, but tankfags shoot them down with "Well they can't do that now, so they can't do it in the future!"
>>
>>377435641
Tanks can't handle any terrain besides smooth flat surfaces and obviously there is real uses for high profiles, making mechs the superior machine
>>
>>377435641
see >>377433423

tanks can only operate under specific conditions and cant move sideways or engage in close quarters combat unless they have a large buffer of infantry units for support
>>
>>377435591
No prob bob.
So arguing aside what's the best current Gen mech game?
>>
>>377435597
That's just like your opinion, man.
>>
File: 1458282315673.png (116 KB, 231x342)
116 KB
116 KB PNG
>>377435632
>designed to take tank rounds
>>
>>377435373
Yeah, everyone's laughing at you.

A tank with the same tech as a meh will be faster, better armored, can carry a larger cannon and with a faster reload and be better off road. The only variant of mech that's remotely viable is small infantry exosuits
>>
File: tanks to meet you2.png (55 KB, 1579x285)
55 KB
55 KB PNG
>>
>>377435779
This is true, I posted supporting tanks with such technology and it got shot down, wtf.
>>377432390
>>
File: 1415004326884.jpg (737 KB, 2500x1794)
737 KB
737 KB JPG
>>377435171
Enjoy getting your artybase run down you little faggot.
>>
>>377432390
How do you know the sufficient weaponry to fuck up tanks is as large and cumbersome in the hypothetical future as it is now?
>>
>>377435875
But mechs would step through most terrain and get stuck or significantly slowed. Not being able to immediately change to the horizontal seems to be a decent tradeoff to moving slower or being completely immobilized. Plus being lower profile means being less of a target when navigating out of the problem spot.
>>
>>377435914
>A tank with the same tech as a meh will be faster, better armored, can carry a larger cannon and with a faster reload and be better off road.
Only proving my point with that laughable idea.
Tankfags are as bad as doomfags who insist that classic doom is the best video game ever.
>>
>>377436027
tanks have the same amount of "joints" that disable movement that mechs do

if you destroy a tank's tracks, even just one it cant move effectively
same thing for a mech - take out one knee and it cant move effectively
>>
File: Predator.jpg (479 KB, 1080x810)
479 KB
479 KB JPG
>>377436128
>Implying you won't get predatord before you get within a hundred miles of the firebase

makes me laugh very very bigly
>>
>>377436161
If everyone can carry a pocket AT gun mechs will be reduced to little more than expensive coffins as well, you know?
>>
>>377436251
So I take it you have absolutely no idea about how vehicles work?
>>
>>377435821
How does a mech handle them better though? A tank could drive over some pretty uneven terrain, even an area with fallen trees, a mech would stumble. Hell, a mech would thrust its feet deep into soil when taking steps, making normal land bad terrain for it, and it would likely put its feet through roads into sewer systems and pipelines in urban scenarios, thus making it clumsy. I don't see how these are advantages.
>>
>>377436263
Only difference is with a mech if you take out a knee it still has 3 limbs to hobble on, check mate tanks
>>
>>377436330
So I take it you have no idea what you're talking about?
>>
>>377421052
Why anime is this level of autism??
Thank missile hits and explodes directly into the mecha (Total articulated machine, if you know what this means) and nothing happens.

Nigga, just don't put a scene like that, post mechas fighting metal robot lions or another similar shit.
>>
>>377436289
If you get to bring your friends, than I'll call mine.
>>
>>377436441
Oh no they're taking damage. They were just too lazy to actually model the damage in.
>>
>>377436170
im sure something like snow shoes could be retro fitted onto a mech's feet easier than retro fitting an all terrain tank, which is essentially a pipe dream

then again mechs are pipe dream in and of themselves
>>
>>377436427
>says the guy who thinks that bipedal vehicles are better than tracked.
My fucking sides. I am curious though, please explain how a mech would beat a tank in any of the categories I mentioned
>>
>>377436415
how you gon aim the gun dou?
>>
File: 1334908635585.jpg (257 KB, 1800x1200)
257 KB
257 KB JPG
Threaded vehicles can't handle difficult ter...
>>
>>377436441
All anime have autism
>>
File: saejima-juuzou.jpg (106 KB, 500x1127)
106 KB
106 KB JPG
>>377416306
>>377416479
/thread
>>
>>377436582
I mean, I'm shit talking mechs a lot, but I really do love em. It's just they're in no way something that would ever realistically happen. Snow shoes would be a start, but would pretty much cut the mobility factor, unless you can still move very quickly in them. At that point you're better off in a tank anyway.
>>
File: boom.jpg (688 KB, 2048x1272)
688 KB
688 KB JPG
>>377436459
That's a nice target you have there
>>
If Titans were a reality, they're superior to tanks in almost every way

Except top speed on straight line
>>
>>377436696
How about climbing up a cliff? Checkmate tanks. Do you have webms of those tank agility contests? They're pretty cool.
>>
File: rocky.jpg (1.75 MB, 5616x3138)
1.75 MB
1.75 MB JPG
>>377436696
>That
>Difficult terrain
>>
>>377425517
except weighting double digit tons.
>>
>>377436776
i thought you were talking about getting stuck in bad terrain?
tanks dont fare well in mud
>>
>>377436860
The ground is softer than you'd think, and focusing all that weight into two points is a very bad idea on any terrain.
>>
>>377436789
you gotta find it first nigga
>>
>>377434749
>enemy tank launches a barrel launched twostage depleted uranium liner tandem heat missile at your mech
>as your EWS informs you of the incoming missile in enters the second stage and accelerates to 3,5km/s and penetrates your dickpit in 0,28 seconds
>>
>>377436860
Compared to current tanks of course, but what if we used that level of technology to build a advanced tank?
>>
>>377436684
Nipple guns
>>
>>377436935
>implaying a mech wouldn't be fucked on this as well
I'd like to see how many times a mech would slip and fall on this.
>>
>>377436943
Commpared to a mech of comparable size they'd pretty much breeze right through it
>>
>>377437103
into the ground? or up at god?
>>
>>377436943
a mech would do even worse, it would be like goddamn qucksand
>>
will you buy Gundam Versus?
>>
>>377426672
People forget that any weapon capable of being mounted on and fired by a mech is just as capable of being mounted on the more stable firing platform that is the tank.
>>
>>377437127
hopefully no mechanized war machine will need to assault on terrain like that?
>>377437241
so then both would suck equally
dem snow shoes would help yea?
>>
File: 1398680388369.jpg (323 KB, 1500x946)
323 KB
323 KB JPG
>>377436789
I love arty senpai, we should just buddy up and fend off the mechfag menace.
>>
Tanks have a poor vertical cone of fire. They cannot fire straight up or in a downward angle unless on an incline.

Checkmate, tankfags.
>>
>>377437163
Into tank
>>
>>377435532
>that forest and field
I've shat on both
>>
>>377437008
Titans aren't that big, first
Second that's why legs are awesome, because of superior torque
And to think a Titan sized mech would sink into the ground is ridiculous, or even a Mechwarrior sized mech. You don't see elehants worrying about sinking into the ground

Fucking buildings exist for years before sinking in it's all about weight dispersion
>>
>>377434336
>sidestepping bullets, artillery, apds, etc.
Lmao what? Is everyone in favour of mechs here 12 years old or something?
>>
>>377437342
>snow shoes
I have a better idea, why not replace the feet with tracks?
>>
>>377437371
I too
>>
File: reactors-online.gif (941 KB, 400x351)
941 KB
941 KB GIF
>>377437127
At least the mech might actually make any headway. Any tracked vehicle would slip on the starting line without fail.

Really, the only place a mech is worth a single fuck is heavy urban combat. Much harder for a tank to change direction and take cover than it would be for a mech.
>>
>>377437498
like votoms
you better be talking about votoms

also tracks suck on bad terrain is why
>>
File: sentinel.jpg (99 KB, 634x664)
99 KB
99 KB JPG
>>377437064
Already know where they are, nigga.
>>
>>377436263
Wrong, the treads are even now covered in armored plating to cover this weakness as they have already been exploited before, of course you could also add this coverage to vital joint areas as well but this would also hinder the movement capability of the mech which has been argued non stop by mechfags as essential, don't get me wrong i love mechs but realistically they would not hold up against a tank with an equal level of technology.

As a final note: one hit to the legs of a mech and the mobility is compromised, best bet would be a hybrid.
>>
>>377437462
>You don't see elehants worrying about sinking into the ground
An elephant weighs around 4-8 tons, iirc. An MBT weighs between 60 and 80 tons.
>>
>>377437072
Like an armed tank?

Or a legged turret?

Joke aside, I could see something like a Metal Slug or a spider tank with threads on its feet that can go into "tank mode" for driving and extending the legs to climb stuff when needed
>>
File: Anon does his best.jpg (23 KB, 640x480)
23 KB
23 KB JPG
>>377437568
Come the fuck on
>>
>>377437569
warfare has changed

looks like COD's advanced warfare had the right idea including space combat levels

gotta take out their satellites first to destroy their intel capabilities
>>
>>377431015
Cid was best titian A.I voice.
>>
>>377431552
>provided it is as mobile as vidya tends to depict them as.
But they're not. And tanks are mobile as all fuck too you know, they're not the ww1 tanks anymore, it's not realistic that a mech can reach the same speeds and mobility as a tank, and if you look at any legged robot design, they're not masters of quickly changing direction etc like you seem to think they will, versus a tank that can reverse sanic fast.
>>
>>377437635
>>377437759

but then you got the clearance issue AND reduced mobility

tanks are bad in close quarters, which is essentially a mechs strong point - being able to navigate complicated (urban) terrain

in a game like Front Mission (snes) i believe the only advantage tracks had was more move distance whereas legs provide better climb distance so there's that trade off again
>>
>>377437663
BT says he weighs 40 tons
>>
>>377437967
No one is arguing that current day robotics can produce Titans, just that it will eventually be possible to create such machines. And then they will be more mobile than tanks.

Whether or not that will cause the basic tank design to become obsolete or cause a new design to surface is arguable. Personally, I think tanks will advance as well, and both technologies will co-exist.
>>
>>377430126
Nitro CTF was too good
I hope it comes back
>>
>>377437342
Snowshoes would maybe allow it to move if it could overcome the immense suction force of lifting it's legs to take steps without completely sinking the other one. Probably not.
>>
File: 1447742995404.png (126 KB, 259x194)
126 KB
126 KB PNG
>>377438210
>y-yeah, but how about magic future tech
>b-but you can't apply that super tech to tanks
Why does every pro-mecha argument boil down to this?
>>
>>377437387
If you need to fire straight up or down in any heavy vehicle, you're already up shit creek. It doesn't matter if you're in a tank or a mech, you're dead at that point
>>
>>377438210
Once again on an even level of tech tanks will always be better overall except in close quarters urban operations. Only exception is when we start moving into gundam territory, but im sure you realize the flaw with that.
>>
File: Metal Gear Rex.jpg (402 KB, 1500x700)
402 KB
402 KB JPG
Why not both?
>>
>>377438394
>I did not read the post I replied to: the post

I specifically mentioned that tanks will advance as well and the two technologies will co-exist.
>>
File: RX-75-4.jpg (179 KB, 366x529)
179 KB
179 KB JPG
too bad tanks don't have any videogames about them anymore, well aside of guntank
>>
File: tanks to meet you3.png (283 KB, 1832x789)
283 KB
283 KB PNG
>>377437664
transformable weapons are probably a engineer's nightmare to design and maintain

tldr
cost determines feasibility
>>
>>377438419
>Not shooting at enemy aircraft as it passes over

What are u? casul?
>>
Why do autistic people think that body type of the homo sapien is the most ideal shape for ballistic warfare?
>>
>>377438394
As an engineer it infuriates me to see people talking like that. Fuck no mechfag ever understands basic concepts like loading.
>>
>>377438210
But even then, they won't suddenly be human levels of agility, people seem to think they'll be jumping around, with no regard for basic laws about size and weight. And of cours vastly underestimating tanks.
>>
>>377438643
AYO, WE WUZ WEAPONS PLATFORMS 'N SHIEEEEEEEEEET
>>
>>377438671
I'm an engineer and I think mechs would work great in that regard.
>>
File: 1481655815010.gif (3.39 MB, 640x360)
3.39 MB
3.39 MB GIF
If tanks are so great, where are games about them? New ones.
>>
>No one really giving the role mechs could fill in combat.

MECHS:
>Can be built very small, same weight class as a jeep or humvee with a much more narrow body and only somewhat taller.
>Frame can mount much heavier weapons than infantry, small frame is easier to maneuver around dense obstacles compared to a long wheelbase or tracks.
>Shielding against small arms fire can be done with lightweight metals, infantry screens can provide cover against large caliber cannons.
>Most ATGMs are defeated by electronics packages rather than brute armor, further reducing the need for thicker, sloped plates.
>Can serve as an AT/AA platform with a much more mobile supply of munitions due to not needing an infantry team to lug around crates of ammo to use.

Seriously, make them 2.5-3 meters tall and use them as fire support platforms in platoons. No need to make a fireteam carry a few TOW missiles when you can mount 15 of them on a mech chassis and have a single man load and fire them. And less of a problem with relocating after firing too.
>>
>>377438734
inertia is the killer
>>
File: 45745732.png (140 KB, 521x263)
140 KB
140 KB PNG
>>377438083
The argument hence far has been video game standards compared to realistic standards, as for tanks being bad in close quarters that can depend upon the mounted weaponry provided but more importantly logistics as well, for a realistic setting you need to do is weight and propulsion study:

>Tank: roughly 62 metric tons in real life.

>In Armored Core a Heavyweight AC - 8-10 tons

Now you have the reality verses fantasy argument aka autism, to balance this out you would apply this weight factor and other mech components such as side and foward thrusters to a tank, anti-grav is an option too, and from there you have where most of these arguments have been ending up.
>>
File: railways.png (125 KB, 587x491)
125 KB
125 KB PNG
>ITT
>>
>>377438210
if we get technology like that my guess will be that we'll get floating armored, weaponized balls
it's the perfect shape
>>
>>377437462
Weight dispersion that mech wouldn't have.
>>
>>377438827
What type of engineer though?
>>
>>377439045
Inb4 software "engineer".
>>
Cause they are fucking radical.
In a movement based game like Titanfall 2 you would have to be retarded to play as a tank.
>>
>>377438958
>physically feasible concept, although at that time still in a developmental stage
>vs JUST FUCK MY LAWS OF PHYSICS UP
>>
>>377438642
If it's passing over, then it's payload is likely a heartbeat away from you.
>>
>>377439268
Bipedal locomotion is the shit for rough terrain traversal, we've just got a hell of a long way to go until it's actually feasible for machines.
>>
>>377417446
Well said.
>>
>>377439268
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Re6P7WP2N5w

You don't think this is a physically feasible concept, although still in a developmental stage?
>>
>>377438957
>Now you have the reality verses fantasy argument aka autism

This was in the OP so I don't know what you expected.
>>
>>377438734
everyone knows the human shape for weapons of war are vastly superior to any other shape on this planet
>>
>>377439473
Nobody's arguing against small exo-suit like mechs for infantry support though. Huge-ass mechas carrying tank tier weaponry are another thing
>>
File: 1493364636577.png (643 KB, 1022x731)
643 KB
643 KB PNG
>>377438958
>the railroad industry has a vested interest in try to keep the public away from other forms of transportation that ACTUALLY EXISTED AT THE TIME
Who'd have thought. That's totally the same thing as arguing against science fantasy shit that doesn't exist right now.
>>
File: 183214.jpg (243 KB, 800x450)
243 KB
243 KB JPG
>>377439575
word
>>
>>377439636
Exactly.
>>
>>377439636
That's not really that small though. It's the size of three full grown men, and could probably be fitted with portable AT weaponry. I could see something like this even being able to brace and fire weapons with larger recoil, too.

It's not really an exo-suit anymore at that size, it's an actual mech.
>>
>>377439709
>Science fantasy shit that doesn't exist right now
>Posted right after a video of a prototype mech was posted
>>
>>377425952
>12.7mm (.50cal) is fist sized
You have a very small fist.
>>
>>377439937
But in terms of looking at role and doctrine, it's in no way comparable to a tank, and what this thread is about is that it will never be that.

Best it can hope for is small armored vehicle similar to older light tanks or IFV's, but lacking the long range mobility of the former and not having the option to transport infantry like the latter.
>>
>>377429656
>you live in the timeline where Tribes is ded
>>
>>377440258
True, but that's all assuming it will never perform significantly better than now, which is most definitely not the case. Development is ongoing and the prototype has already garnered a shit ton of interest from multiple industries, including weapons and materiel manufacturers.
>>
File: 1364333272021.png (78 KB, 253x235)
78 KB
78 KB PNG
>>377440102
Who would win in a fight, that prototype or any tank?
>>
>>377440559
Which would take people faster from place A to place B, a train or the first automobile ever made?
>>
>>377440528
But those things won't change realistically, it isn't realistic for a mech to be armored and armed like a tank, nor for cross country perfomance to be good enough for a recon vehicle.
>>
PAY ATTENTION YOU MISERABLE PETTY FUCKSTAINS.


MECHS WOULDN'T REPLACE TANKS. THEY WOULD SIMPLY FULFILL THEIR OWN SPECIALIZED ROLES IN ADDITION TO BECOMING THE NEW HEAVY WORKHORSE OF THE MILITARY FOR LIFTING/MOVING CARGO/MUNITIONS. MECHS AS DEPICTED IN TITANFALL ARE PERFECTLY REASONABLE IN TERMS OF PRACTICALITY AND VIABILITY. THEY'RE CAPABLE OF RAPID DEPLOYMENT AND EXTREME MOBILITY. YOU COULD RECON A BASE, CALL IN TITANS, WRECK THE BASE AND BE OUT OF THE AREA BEFORE THE ENEMY COULD SEND TRADITIONAL REINFORCEMENTS.

DON'T FORGET THAT TITANFALL'S MILITARY IS ACTUALLY PRETTY TRADITIONAL WITH THE EXCEPTION OF "PILOTS" WHO FULFILL A SPEC OPS UBER SOLDIER TYPE ROLE AND USE TITANS FOR BLITZ TYPE TACTICS.
>>
>>377433218
>dug in infantry are literally immune to everything but a direct hit by a nuclear weapon
>this proves that the human body is inferior
k
>>
>>377440694
>modern trains travel at 220+ kph
Really fires up those neurons
>>
>>377440694
>Trains don't still exist and are still more useful at various tasks than automobiles
>>
>>377440836
>It isn't realistic

On what grounds? I'm sure someone who lived in the middle ages would have thought that going to the heavens and beyond would not be a realistic endeavor, yet here we are.
>>
>>377440939
>>377440963
Again, I'm not advocating for mechs making tanks useless, just that they will come to exist alongside tanks, just like cars did with trains.
>>
>>377433776
>play a map with lvl2 hill changes
>play a map with heavy forest
>play a map with water
>play with basic mobility through armor critical
you didn't play battletech.

also there are force size modifiers to prevent you from bringing 1,000 Toyota Hilux technicals.
>>
>>377441009
Because if you can have x amount of armor on a biped, you can have an even greate amount on the tank, because the form is far more effecient when it comes to defense.
>>
File: ThrustSSC.jpg (258 KB, 1600x1200)
258 KB
258 KB JPG
>>377440939
>220+ kph

You are like a little baby to me
>>
>>377441229
Can that transport several hundred people at once though?
>>
File: Exo_render_05c_open_01.jpg (273 KB, 1600x1197)
273 KB
273 KB JPG
>>377417446
>hit mech into the leg
>it's useless junkyard now
>hit tank into the leg
>silly human tanks don't have legs

I love mechs but they are objectively worse because of their weak points, also the complexity to control mechs is often completely ignored for the rule of cool as well.
>>
>>377441195
This, sames goes with armaments. A human form mecha would most likely just rip himself apart if he fired a 125mm gun
>>
>>377441195
But amount of armor is not all that matters when designing a combat vehicle. You have to take into account mobility, target acquisition, angles of fire (this is a big one that tanks struggle with, especially vertically) etc.
>>
>>377441312
Better question, can even turn?
>>
>>377440694
Depends. In some places trains are infinitely faster.
>>
File: easy terrain.jpg (1.52 MB, 3264x1832)
1.52 MB
1.52 MB JPG
>>377436696
no climb a boulder field.
>>
>>377441102
I'm just sick of hearing
>tankfags are delusional, a mech with is own mini fusion reactor and armor that can stop supersonic depleted uranium coated tungsten rounds would destroy a shitty tank every time
>>
>>377441312
The amount of people transported was not the point of contention, though.
>>
>>377441357
A big problem as evident in this thread is that people think mechs are these super agile monsters that can move freely like humans.

Even Gundam couldn't achieve that pseudoscience without inventing a magic element to do it.
>>
File: maxresdefault.jpg (289 KB, 2000x1119)
289 KB
289 KB JPG
>>377441429
>>377436696
Heard you were talkin' shit about my buddy Abrams like i wouldn't find out
>>
File: AT43.jpg (207 KB, 1024x522)
207 KB
207 KB JPG
Why can't both exist at the same time?
>>
>>377441416
But armor, armanent and cross country mobility are very big factors for tanks (in doctrine word) where the current tank design is far better than mechs. Leading back to my earlier point .
>>
>>377441410
those 155mm field guns sure rip themselves apart when fired when only supported by some metal plates and wheels
>>
>>377441904
Christ I'm tired, when I phrase myself as poorly as doctrine word I mean that in their current role, not specifically the design of a tank.
>>
>>377441943
they're also not standing two meters above the ground on two legs
>>
>>377441713
SA-16 says hi
>>
>>377441713
space based lasers will make all air units and missiles obsolete. Only heavily armoured units would still be able to fight
>>
>>377441989
Two legs that can be used to take a wide, braced firing stance (even taking a knee, if needed), mind you.
>>
>>377441562
Also tanks are already very fast and to even warrant bipedal locomotion (lets just pretend we have the required technology) the terrain must be so varried that artillery and aircraft is always a better option.

I still love mechs and don't mind them in games (like Titanfall) though. It's really cool to fight with/against them.
>>
>>377441943
>can easily roll/slide back to deal with recoil
>not mounted on a flimsy human-like framework
>>
>>377430492
how many and how big stairs do tanks usually need to climb?
>>
>>377442092
varied*
>>
>>377441989
if recoil can be compensated for on a lightweight gun carriage, I'm sure something can be worked out.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZJ88UlIy-U
>>
>>377442067
And suddenly they're no longer mobile if they need to set up for firing
>>
>>377440918
if you want to make a bunker for mechs that will withstand "anything but a direct nuke", you might as well, like, build a bunker with a gun, or several guns, like we did in WW1 and WW2

they're kind of obsolete, though, just bit targets
>>
>>377442215
Mechs have limbs which can be used for combat engineering, aka digging earthworks.

Best you can do with a tank is carry a bulldozer blade.
>>
>>377442206
Being capable of firing on the move does not mean you are more mobile, though. That still doesn't make the tank capable of navigating terrain that a bipedal robot could.
>>
File: 1486657592158.jpg (61 KB, 670x503)
61 KB
61 KB JPG
>>377442215
>coastal artillery batteries will never be a thing again
>>
>>377440918
No, that shows how profile makes an astronomcal impact on the chance of being destroyed, tanks due to their profile are "prone" all the time while still being able to move around.
>>
>>377442315
>multi million dollar warmachine takes out shovel and starts digging
Are you actually trying to be infuriatingly retarded?
>>
>>377442401
Again you seem to think that tanks can't go up a slight incline, they can go damn near anywhere, even if the mech can take a slightly shoter route, but that balances out on being slower cross country.
>>
>>377442575
Tanks cannot scale anything that is higher than their treads.
>>
>>377442493
>tanks are prone
no, tanks in defilade in hull down or turret down profiles are "prone"

There is no reason a gun on a shoulder or arm can't be used to fire over terrain while the rest of the vehicle is protected from direct fire.

Can a tank sidestep through a forest?
>>
File: 151123-A-HO673-954.jpg (71 KB, 655x434)
71 KB
71 KB JPG
>>377442518
https://www.defense.gov/Photos/Essay-View/CollectionID/14608/

They dig in tanks, why wouldn't you dig in other equipment? This tank was dug in by a bulldozer, then the men got out and camouflaged it.
>>
>>377442714
But that type of mobility ultimately doesn't matter that much, that type of small obstacles don't matter in the larger picture, since you can go around, destroy it or get engineers to make a ramp.
>>
File: 1323705304519.jpg (596 KB, 907x1046)
596 KB
596 KB JPG
>>377442736
If you want to go full retard you can use that tank design with a telescopic turret that can elevate above cover or better yet just use indirect fire.
>>
Mechs seem to have more utility, one mech can do the work of a group of small cranes and cargo trucks, and has more mobility to assist in building infrastructure on the battlefield
>>
File: maxresdefault[1].jpg (294 KB, 1920x1080)
294 KB
294 KB JPG
>>377416306
What about mechs that can turn into tanks?

pic not really related
>>
Bipedal mechs are a gimmick. Spider tanks are an actual improvement.
>>
>>377443328
So they are logistic tools, I can see exoskeletons being used for that as well.
>>
File: ebin.png (34 KB, 1615x858)
34 KB
34 KB PNG
>>
>>377443328
>Mechs can do the work of cargo trucks
>Is more mobile
They likely can't move faster than 30 kmph m8. That's a supply line from the 60's speed.
>>
>>377436935
why do you need to get a tank here?
>>
>>377443328
The problem is, is it better than dedicated machines for that, will it have the same amount of load as a proper crane etc.

In general the issue with the mech that people talk about in this thread is that it's a jack of all trades that would still be too expensive and not having a role in combined arms.
>>
>>377443489
I can't tell if this is a troll post or not. You prectically never encounter that terrain.
>>
>>377443321
What a beauty, what tank is that?
>>
>>377421383
/bread
>>
>>377416306
Because videogames and rule of cool you fucking mouth breathing twat
>>
File: Titanfall.webm (2.84 MB, 352x320)
2.84 MB
2.84 MB WEBM
>>377441357
>Hit tank in the treads, where there's a fuckton of small pieces to replace
>It's a useless junkyard now
At least a mech would still be able to move.

Also good luck trying to hit a mech on the leg while it's on the move, faggot. Especially one that can dodge, like the ones from Titanfall.
>>
>>377443647
"Terrain" like that is everywhere in urban environments.
>>
File: 1398620318215.jpg (133 KB, 850x577)
133 KB
133 KB JPG
Tanks are specially good at fighting in dug in positions, you can make one hastly then set him there and after one shot reverse quickly and move to another prepared position without exposing the vehicle too much.
>>
>>377443436
Sure, make the exoskeleton bigger and it can do more, and give it a few weapons and it can also respond to certain combat situations would the need arise. You now have a mech

>>377443539
I was more referring to just ferrying supplies and materials throughout the battlefield or wherever its stationed. Having a mech pick up a supply cache and carry it 300 feet is faster than loading onto a truck or forklift, especially if the terrain doesnt allow for something like a forklift.

>>377443593
Agreed, the way thier depicted in Titanfall doesnt make much sense (which is fine, rule of cool and all that) But i could imagine mechs for tasks one could imagine a human in a powered exoskeleton doing, just scaled up
>>
File: geologist02_AB.jpg (209 KB, 800x1131)
209 KB
209 KB JPG
>>377443489
>engineer
>yes sir
>I need a ramp
>right away sir
>>
>>377443985
>implying that will be nearly as fast as just stepping up that ledge
>>
>>377443912
Urban enviroments are either for shelling to ruins with artillery and aircraft or infantry.
Using large amounts of massive mechanized equipment in such enviroments is
>Arabian tactics
level of martial knowledge.
>>
From a design perspective, mecha should all be fucking centaurs since the only reason we gave up all the tremendous benefits of having four legs was in order to use our front legs as tool manipulators. Robots don't have to be built with evolutionary constraints, so they can have four legs AND tool manipulators. Humanoid mecha are just... inefficient and dumb. It's pure hubris, arrogance, to waste resources on making them look like us.
>>
>>377444107
Unless said mechanized equipment is specifically designed for urban combat.
>>
File: what.gif (3.76 MB, 480x270)
3.76 MB
3.76 MB GIF
>>377443898
>good luck trying to hit a mech on the leg while it's on the move
>Especially one that can dodge
This is what mechfags really believe
>>
File: 9.jpg (671 KB, 1475x724)
671 KB
671 KB JPG
These tanks you talk about sounds pretty good.
So when they are getting their game then?
>>
>>377443974
Actually as a guy pointed out earlier, perhaps the only realistic place for them would be basically super special forces, a place where their utlity would come in handy.
>>377444073
Yes but what does it matter that you can cross the ledge if you don't have the armor to face what is on the other side?
>>
File: Instant slope.jpg (48 KB, 590x300)
48 KB
48 KB JPG
>>377444073
Less than a minute to turn a wall into a slope.
>>
File: hedberg apu.png (30 KB, 857x921)
30 KB
30 KB PNG
>>377443898
>hit tank in the treads
>destroy some links
>crew gets out and replaces the damaged links

>hit mech in the knee
>leg blown off
>???
>profit
>>
>>377444241
Heard of a game called World of Tanks? Or War Thunder?
>>
>>377443974
>Having a mech pick up a supply cache and carry it 300 feet is faster than loading onto a truck or forklift
Why would you unload the supplies from the truck to begin with if that's not where you're going to use them? In any case, if the supplies are stationary then the artillery that are 300 feet away will just have to move the distance instead.
>>
>>377444337
>online f2p bullshit
I'm talking about real games you know
>>
>>377444263
I could see that

Is the campaign depicted in titanfall 2 not basically as "special" as special forces get?
>>
>>377444337
War thunders mbt april's fools event was fun.
>>
>>377416306
Why are weebs such dumb cunts? As a mechatronics engineer let me lay this out for all you dumbarses with no knowledge of physics or practical design.
centres of mass are a thing. Like a really important thing. In nature we as bipedal only maintain balance through a massive network of effectors governed by the brain and a multitude of organ systems. If you look at modern robots being build today they're usually quadrapeds and the biped ones can't even walk up the stairs. They're usually only but 3 ft tall too. Image how difficult balancing the centre of gravity of something which probably has a calf of the equivalent weight of an SUV. That shit is going to fall faster than you can say senpai or whatever jap term you want to use. Like who knows which way it'll fall over either. The odds of it getting back up, especially with actuators we have today, are fault laughable.
>>
File: 280.jpg (23 KB, 604x403)
23 KB
23 KB JPG
>>377444336
>hit tank in the treads
>destroy some links
>crew gets out and dies to enemy fire because they're in the middle of a fucking fight and their tank is stationary
Dumbass.
>>
File: wut.png (906 KB, 1169x877)
906 KB
906 KB PNG
>>377444394
>Where are the games?
>[Games]
>Not THOSE games
>>
>>377428821
the 3rd person enter and takedown in Titanfall 2 still bugs me

The first game had 1st person and that was cool
>>
>>377444207
Then it would be units so small that they would not be considered mechanized anymore. The whole point about urban fighting being infantry dominated is that buildings make great cover and hiding places at the same time, and streets are natural chokepoints for enemies that can't move through buildings.
>>
File: top kek mate.jpg (24 KB, 300x250)
24 KB
24 KB JPG
>>377444456
>tanks travel alone without any infantry and other tanks to cover them
>>
>>377444481
>seriously considering wasting time on any online game
wew lad
>>
>>377444593
That's the millitary knowledge of mechfags, what did you expect?
>>
File: Titanfall-Spectre.jpg (87 KB, 400x880)
87 KB
87 KB JPG
Mechanized soldiers are the future of warfare.

>None of the problems of mechs
>None of the weaknesses of human soldiers
>Infinite morale and less need for supplies
>>
>>377441943
"I don't understand how forces, stresses or momentum work, but allow me to opine with my shitty opinion"
>>
>>377444406
TiF, like any good mech setting, gives reasons that the impracticality of bipedal mechs is overridden. Namely, that titans were initially a 'minimal training' exosuit used by workers of the IMC during the frontier colonization, but were militarized during the frontier wars as it was cheaper to convert a titan than build or ship a true military vehicle.
>>
>>377443647
You've never seen broken terrain or been to the desert where erosion leads to deep and steep wadis.
>>
File: 1415209982717.jpg (1.24 MB, 3000x1983)
1.24 MB
1.24 MB JPG
>>377443974
>You now have a mech
Yeah even logistic troops need some weapons for self defense while they wait for the cavalry to arrive.
>>
>>377444336
>getting out and replacing treads while being fired upon
idiot

a one-legged mech can still limp or crawl, a one track tank can move in a semicircle at best. And a busted knee doesn't mean that leg is useless, just lock it straight and use it like a peg leg.
>>
>>377444924
>Incapable of decision making
>More expensive than human soldiers
>Very expensive to invent
>Requires very advanced factories to be made
>Humans can be trained in a barracks and a shooting range
>>
File: sweating.jpg (38 KB, 560x560)
38 KB
38 KB JPG
>>377444924
>Mechanized soldiers become a thing
>Since AI cannot adapt in combat like real humans can, they are made remote controlled instead
>War literally becomes a game
>>
>>377444593
>mechs travel alone without infantry and other tanks, mechs, drones and aircraft covering them
you're an idiot.
>>
>>377445054
Was this supposed to be a jab at me/mechs? were in agreement, mechs are fuckin rad but really dont make a whole lot of sense as purely combat vehicles/weaponsplatforms
>>
File: i love hispanics.png (131 KB, 324x330)
131 KB
131 KB PNG
>>377445182
see
>>377444593
>being a delusional mechnigger
>calling others idiots
>>
>>377444935
You're one of those fags who thinks jet fuel can't melt steel.

>if we design this to fail it will fail
>if we understand the forces involve and compensate for them the issue will be compensated for
recoil isn't insurmountable, recoil that imparts torque isn't insurmountable.
>>
>>377445009
Looking up some images of wadis, they don't look like two meter tall rocks that a mech can easily climb, so there's still no incentive towards mechs.
>>
>>377445268
His point is that it's "easy" to repair a track in the field, not so for a mech leg.
>>
File: 1448027466849.jpg (223 KB, 2048x1437)
223 KB
223 KB JPG
Imagine a functional railgun mounted on a tank, suddenly that mound of dirty 10 kilometers away burts into a ball of plasma, resulted from the friction of the projectile with the air, and fucks your shit up in a microsecond.
>>
File: edgypetteri.jpg (77 KB, 504x504)
77 KB
77 KB JPG
>>377445268
which is easier to replace, a few links of a tread or an entire knee with a bunch of electronics and wires?
>>
>>377444941
When we actually have logistical exosuits somebody is going to make it more nimble, and somebody else is going to put guns on it, then some people will get rekt by an exosuit with guns and everyone will claim combat mechs were a good idea all along.
>>
>>377445221
>Implying human solders are anything more than numbers to the brass and politicians anyway
>>
>>377445424
That's not how railguns work you dip.
>>
>>377442315
you can also use conscripts for the same goal

cheap and efficient
>>
>>377445421
>>377445482
Why would it be hard?

Maybe you just remove some bolts and swap a spare part in?

Why does it have to be complex or difficult? Is it complex or difficult to replace a wheel on a car? That's completely different from a tank track.

And the whole rest of the mech still works to help replace the busted knee joint.
>>
File: 1423153919169.jpg (130 KB, 1024x816)
130 KB
130 KB JPG
>tanks aren't co...
How can mechfags even compete?
>>
>>377444128
You are right but it looks cool, doesn't it? Centaur mechs aren't as cool. Maybe something like this?
>>
>>377445652
30 slaves don't work as fast as one backhoe or bulldozer or bucket crane. We have mechanization for a reason.

A small mech with excavation equipment will be at least similar to a backhoe in capability.
>>
File: Railgun_usnavy_2008.jpg (1.48 MB, 2100x1575)
1.48 MB
1.48 MB JPG
>>377445640
>>
>>377445727
Because if the mech is going to be as mobile, heavy and armored as you think it will be (or rather, as it needs to be in any way competetive with a tank) Then that legs needs to be heavy, and incredibly advanced.
>>
File: jeb.png (479 KB, 312x342)
479 KB
479 KB PNG
>>377445727
right, sorry i forgot wheels have tons of electronics, wires and various sensitive sensors in them
>>
>>377444941
I thought the reasoning for mechs in Titalfall was that the Frontier has easily repurposable mech facories, previously making contruction and agricultural mechs, and heavier factories that make tanks and the like are only found on earth and similar core worlds. Possibly also something about tanks not working well with drop pods, unlike titans.
>>
>>377444924
They're good, but remember the economic grounds: iIf an $80k missile takes down a $6.5mil tank, it's more cost-effective to not use tanks.

That economic barrier only weakens as the efficiency of production and wealth of society has risen enough to minimize the cost, and may remain insurmountable for certain technologies. It's the reason USA programs for anti-missile laser systems (Star Wars and YAL-1) have been shelved.

>>377445501
See above. Hotshot tech's goal is to create a paradigm shift (cavalry meets artillery, trench meets tanks, etc) which justifies the cost.
>>
>>377445893
No mounds of dirt turn into plasma, there's flames when conventional shells fire too you know. And even with railgun speeds, a projectile won't move 10 kilometers a microsecond. Not in the Earth's atmosphere at least.
>>
File: 1395195388119.jpg (1.62 MB, 3000x2400)
1.62 MB
1.62 MB JPG
>>377445835
It would be cool to see small mechs and flying drones supporting MBTs in various ways, digging defensive positions, intercepting ATGMs, spoting targets, changing tracks under fire..
>>
>>377446147
>what's hyperbole
Calm down your autism.
>>
>>377446156
All those things can be done by infantry or are already existing capabilites of tanks.
>>
>>377445908
>>377445903
How much work is it to connect or disconnect a trailer? You back it in, lower the trailer onto the ball joint and connect the lights. Literally some kind of structural connection and some wires. So fucking hard. Okay maybe there is a hydraulic hose too.

tank tracks aren't easy to put on either you've got to remove damaged links, add new ones, lay it out, drive the tank onto its new track, reconnect the link, tension it properly and probably a few more sanity checks and shit the techmanual says to do.

Just because it might take minutes in the best case or hours worst case doesn't mean it isn't practical in a combat environment.

You don't fix tank treads when receiving direct fire. Nor would you dismount and fix anything else unless you had safety of the repair crew from imminent danger.
>>
>>377446224
In this thread there are stupider claims than your railgun fantasy.
>>
>>377446359
It's hilarious how little of a clue you have, on anything, I guess this is the power of mechfags.
>>
>>377446128
>They're good, but remember the economic grounds: iIf an $80k missile takes down a $6.5mil tank, it's more cost-effective to not use tanks.
that is simply incorrect, you cannot afford not to have a tank, it is a very useful direct fire cannon and machine guns on an armored platform.

Yes a $1 bullet can kill a $400,000 soldier, but that doesn't mean you only use $30,000 or cheaper Janissaries (slave soldier).
>>
>>377436860

>Bigger profile
>Far more limited in the surfaces it could walk on
>Completely useless shit if it loses a leg or gets imbalanced

A fucking Emperor-class Titan got OHKO'd in Helsreach by Boyz detonating IEDs around the ground it was standing on and unbalancing it so it tipped over. Titan's are fucking gay.
>>
>>377446303
>put infantryman in small exoskeleton (power suit)
>this triggers tankfags
the difference between a power suit and a mecha is mostly academic.
>>
>>377446463
But it just werks in my chinese cartoons!
>>
File: early plane.jpg (130 KB, 945x599)
130 KB
130 KB JPG
>A device to make a man fly like a bird?
>Preposterous! The horse and train shall always be the pre-eminent method of transportation.
>>
File: codspare.jpg (25 KB, 408x408)
25 KB
25 KB JPG
>>377446359
but how big a replacement part are you going to carry with you? just the knee joint? what if you get shot a bit above the knee join, tough luck now you are stranded

whereas with tank tracks, it doesnt matter which link gets broken because the replacement links you are carrying will still fit
>>
>>377446703
The difference between infantry and small scale mechs is a LOT of money that's better spent elsewhere.
>>
File: hansi.jpg (51 KB, 720x405)
51 KB
51 KB JPG
>>377446724
>planes fly like birds
>>
>>377444446
>Like who knows which way it'll fall over either.
Because humanoids have such a hard time standing up after falling right? Arms don't exist?
>>
>>377446463
>lol I'm so secure on mount stupid
>nothing could possibly change the way things are now
>tanks are invulnerable powerhouses and are not at all vulnerable to aircraft or infantry
>cover, concealment, mobility and other factors have no importance, especially not the use of cover

>tanks have infantry support when the idea of a cavalry tank is to operate as a fast strike force that operates as a distinct force and is only supported by infantry and artillery who may be 50km away or more.
>mecha don't ever have any support that any rational mind would use and always wander off into open fields like drunk hobos




Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.