Board index » MDC Worlds » Robotech® - The Shadow Chronicles® - Macross II®

 


Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: New Marine Book
Unread postPosted: Thu Oct 08, 2015 9:50 pm
  

User avatar
Adventurer

Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2004 9:34 pm
Posts: 652
Frankly, they need new names, if only to avoid confusion between the Cougar Destroid and the Cougar Inorganic.


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Marine Book
Unread postPosted: Thu Oct 08, 2015 9:56 pm
  

User avatar
Rifts® Trivia Master

Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2003 3:37 pm
Posts: 13061
Location: Missouri
to be honest, the UEEF dstroids we have need modified names too.. the model numbering suggests they are just modifications of the macross era designs, but it is clear they are all new construction.

at the very least, the Defender, Tomahawk, etc need to have a "II" added to their names or something.

_________________
Author of Rifts: Deep Frontier (Rifter 70)
Author of Rifts:Scandinavia (current project)
Image
* All fantasy should have a solid base in reality.
* Good sense about trivialities is better than nonsense about things that matter.

-Max Beerbohm
Visit my Website


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Marine Book
Unread postPosted: Thu Oct 08, 2015 10:01 pm
  

User avatar
Adventurer

Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2004 9:34 pm
Posts: 652
In that regard, I'd be perfectly happy applying the Robotech 1e Destroid names to the Expeditionary Force Marines Destroids — mostly. After raiding the naming thread on this forum, I'd go with:

• Raidar X instead of Defender (Rifleman is taken by the VR-011 Cyclone)
• Excalibur instead of Tomahawk (the new one even has a blade!)
• Gladiator instead of Spartan
• Longbow instead of Phalanx (calling it a Spartan would just lead to all sorts of confusion)
• Behemoth instead of Monster (M.A.C. II never set well with me)


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Marine Book
Unread postPosted: Fri Oct 09, 2015 8:20 am
  

User avatar
Knight

Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 6:36 am
Posts: 5004
Location: New Frontier Shipyard, Earth-Moon L5
Comment: "My theories appall you, my heresies outrage you, I never answer letters, and you don't like my tie."
glitterboy2098 wrote:
to be honest, the UEEF dstroids we have need modified names too.. the model numbering suggests they are just modifications of the macross era designs, but it is clear they are all new construction.

*sigh* No, the model numbering suggests literally the exact opposite of what you're saying here.

All of the new destroids in the Marines book have different Design Series numbers from the Macross destroids, which indicates they're off an entirely different set of platforms from the original ones. The original Monster is a Series 00 chassis, the one that the Marines have in the new book is Series 02. The original Tomahawk, Defender, and Phalanx are built on a Series 04 chassis, the new ones in Marines are all Series 05. The original Spartan was a Series 07, the new one is Series 08.

If the new destroids in the Marines book were upgrades/modifications of the Macross destroids, they would have the same Series number and a different design mark. For example, the MBR-04 Tomahawk OSM-ly has four known design marks: the Mk.I prototype, the Mk.IV initial production type, the Mk.IVc air defense variant (evolved into ADR-04), and the Mk.VI production type which was the standard during the First Space War. Or the ADR-04-Mk.X Defender and the postwar ADR-04-Mk.XV upgrade (AKA "Super Defender").



glitterboy2098 wrote:
at the very least, the Defender, Tomahawk, etc need to have a "II" added to their names or something.

They probably wouldn't want to do that to avoid confusion with the Macross II game, which DOES have a Tomahawk II.

_________________
Macross2.net - Home of the Macross Mecha Manual

Zer0 Kay wrote:
Damn you for anticipating my question. I've really got to unfoe you, your information is far more valuable than my sanity when dealing with your blunt callousness. :)


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Marine Book
Unread postPosted: Fri Oct 09, 2015 11:06 am
  

User avatar
Adventurer

Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2004 9:34 pm
Posts: 652
Quite literally the last thing of concern to me is whether or not a Robotech destroid's name clashes with a Macross II destroid's name. Either I'm not mixing the two (in which case, who cares?) or I am; and if I am, the copious warnings of "Robotech and Macross are two different things with some overlap" is more than adequate.


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Marine Book
Unread postPosted: Sat Oct 10, 2015 2:48 am
  

Explorer

Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 6:55 am
Posts: 145
dataweaver wrote:
In that regard, I'd be perfectly happy applying the Robotech 1e Destroid names to the Expeditionary Force Marines Destroids — mostly. After raiding the naming thread on this forum, I'd go with:

• Raidar X instead of Defender (Rifleman is taken by the VR-011 Cyclone)
• Excalibur instead of Tomahawk (the new one even has a blade!)
• Gladiator instead of Spartan
• Longbow instead of Phalanx (calling it a Spartan would just lead to all sorts of confusion)
• Behemoth instead of Monster (M.A.C. II never set well with me)


I'm pretty much following this list myself, save for calling the new Monster the Koromon.

-POUNCER


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Marine Book
Unread postPosted: Sat Oct 10, 2015 9:53 am
  

User avatar
Knight

Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2006 10:50 am
Posts: 6132
Location: WI
Seto wrote:
They probably wouldn't want to do that to avoid confusion with the Macross II game, which DOES have a Tomahawk II.

I'm not sure I see why they would want to avoid the confusion with other game lines from HG's perspective that would seem to allow them to mooch off of Macross in a sensible way.

Seto wrote:
All of the new destroids in the Marines book have different Design Series numbers from the Macross destroids, which indicates they're off an entirely different set of platforms from the original ones. The original Monster is a Series 00 chassis, the one that the Marines have in the new book is Series 02. The original Tomahawk, Defender, and Phalanx are built on a Series 04 chassis, the new ones in Marines are all Series 05. The original Spartan was a Series 07, the new one is Series 08.

Actually I think they do need to go back and redo the designation system for human mecha or come up with an explanation to the overlapping numbers in use by nt-Bs and the messed up way the VTs get assigned.

Veritechs go out of sequential order (-8 comes before -7, -10 before the -9) in the 2E RPG. The Logan (VF-8) was ready in final design in 2018, and service by the end of the year (2019 had over a dozen squadrons ready), compare that to the Beta-7 which doesn't even get a mention before 2020 IINM. A similar situation occurs with the AGAC (VFH-10) and the Beta-9 by RAW, and the AGAC goes back to circa 2028 for first flight (conceptually it goes back to the early 2020s), which the Beta-9 isn't supposed to be anything until around 2035 officially.

With the nt-Bs it isn't as clear cut since "Destroids" could have their own line from the nt-Battloids, but if they are part of the same line they do have overlaps given that the ASC nt-Bs have a -4 and -7/8/9 models. I don't see why the wouldn't overlap either as the ASC nt-Bs are essentially successors to the Spartan Destroids.


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Marine Book
Unread postPosted: Sat Oct 10, 2015 11:02 am
  

User avatar
Knight

Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 6:36 am
Posts: 5004
Location: New Frontier Shipyard, Earth-Moon L5
Comment: "My theories appall you, my heresies outrage you, I never answer letters, and you don't like my tie."
ShadowLogan wrote:
I'm not sure I see why they would want to avoid the confusion with other game lines from HG's perspective that would seem to allow them to mooch off of Macross in a sensible way.

I'd suspect the decision lies more with Palladium's Irving Jackson and Kevin Siembieda, as Harmony Gold doesn't seem to have had much actual input in the Marines book... those two might care about confusion between game lines. I doubt Harmony Gold said any more than the usual "don't make any references or allusions to content we don't have rights to".

(It may be as simple as excessive caution, avoiding using the name "Tomahawk II" because that's connected to the Macross II OVA, which Palladium didn't renew its license to and Harmony Gold never had any rights to.)




ShadowLogan wrote:
Actually I think they do need to go back and redo the designation system for human mecha or come up with an explanation to the overlapping numbers in use by nt-Bs and the messed up way the VTs get assigned.

At this point, with Robotech functionally dead as a franchise, I don't think they'll bother... though the alleged mess is actually much less messy than you give it credit for being.



ShadowLogan wrote:
Veritechs go out of sequential order (-8 comes before -7, -10 before the -9) in the 2E RPG. The Logan (VF-8) was ready in final design in 2018, and service by the end of the year (2019 had over a dozen squadrons ready), compare that to the Beta-7 which doesn't even get a mention before 2020 IINM. A similar situation occurs with the AGAC (VFH-10) and the Beta-9 by RAW, and the AGAC goes back to circa 2028 for first flight (conceptually it goes back to the early 2020s), which the Beta-9 isn't supposed to be anything until around 2035 officially.

The VFs go out of sequential order because Palladium screwed up the continuity-related fluff in the RPG, that's all.

The way it was penned is like it's pre-Sentinels material, assuming that the mecha in each saga came out in the same order as the sagas themselves. That the Masters Saga mecha preceded the New Generation mecha in production and so on and so forth. It's incorrect, to say the least.

The canon order of introduction actually has the numbering system make a reasonable amount of sense, minus the random skips in number that are partially the result of OSM factors the authors tried to allude to. You have, initially:

VF-1 Development starts 2002, deployed 2009
VF-2 SKIPPED1
VF-3 SKIPPED2
VF-4 Assigned to VF-X-4/YF-4 prototype, circa 2014-2015.
VF-5 SKIPPED3
VF-6 Development starts ~2015, deployed 2022.
VF-7 Assigned to VF-X-7 Beta prototype, development started 201?, field testing 2022.
VF-8 Poss. developed alongside VF-X-6/7, deployed sometime after 2022.
VF-9 ABERRANT, developed 2032+, deployed ~2039. (number possibly reserved in advance for program restart?)4
VF-10 ABERRANT, developed 202?, deployed 2029. (see above)



ShadowLogan wrote:
With the nt-Bs it isn't as clear cut since "Destroids" could have their own line from the nt-Battloids, but if they are part of the same line they do have overlaps given that the ASC nt-Bs have a -4 and -7/8/9 models. I don't see why the wouldn't overlap either as the ASC nt-Bs are essentially successors to the Spartan Destroids.

Within the RPG, the UEEF non-tranformables seem to at least partially follow the Destroid designation system, while the ASC ones follow their own... which may be explainable as Leonard's doing, to distinguish his forces from the UEEF's, for the same reason he insisted on developing the ASC's mecha separately to begin with. The RPG just sort of pulls stuff out of its ear when they don't get OSM or official stats to work from, and here they had the square root of bugger-all for everything that wasn't the Condor.

The ASC designs don't even have NAMES in Robotech or Southern Cross, with the exception of the Garm... whose Norse associations are what all the other names spun off of. The OSM has them as literally just <NAME OF UNIT> Robot.




1. Due to the Macross OSM, in which the VF-X-2 was an unsuccessful rival prototype to the VF-X-1.
2. Due to the Macross OSM, in which the VF-X-3 was a rival prototype to the VF-X-4 for which development data was lost due to the destruction of Earth's surface.
3. Due to the MOSPEADA OSM, via the Robotech staff adapting the MOSPEADA AS-C03 Condor's backstory as being the non-transformable predecessor to the AFC-01 Legioss and AB-01 TLEAD into the Condor being a failed pre-Alpha/Beta prototype.
4. This is difficult to explain... as the official line is that the Beta concept was shelved and not revisited until at least 2032, after the introduction of the AGACs. It's possible that the developers of the final Beta requested the number be assigned before the project's start years later, or that the ASC skipped the number 9 due to some cultural context (unlucky numbers are sometimes skipped in a military designation system... 13 is often skipped in Western cultures, and 4 in East Asian cultures).

_________________
Macross2.net - Home of the Macross Mecha Manual

Zer0 Kay wrote:
Damn you for anticipating my question. I've really got to unfoe you, your information is far more valuable than my sanity when dealing with your blunt callousness. :)


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Marine Book
Unread postPosted: Sat Oct 10, 2015 10:41 pm
  

User avatar
Champion

Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2000 1:01 am
Posts: 2678
Location: Dino Swamp (well...should be "underseas")
Seto Kaiba wrote:
ShadowLogan wrote:
Veritechs go out of sequential order (-8 comes before -7, -10 before the -9) in the 2E RPG. The Logan (VF-8) was ready in final design in 2018, and service by the end of the year (2019 had over a dozen squadrons ready), compare that to the Beta-7 which doesn't even get a mention before 2020 IINM. A similar situation occurs with the AGAC (VFH-10) and the Beta-9 by RAW, and the AGAC goes back to circa 2028 for first flight (conceptually it goes back to the early 2020s), which the Beta-9 isn't supposed to be anything until around 2035 officially.

The VFs go out of sequential order because Palladium screwed up the continuity-related fluff in the RPG, that's all.

The way it was penned is like it's pre-Sentinels material, assuming that the mecha in each saga came out in the same order as the sagas themselves. That the Masters Saga mecha preceded the New Generation mecha in production and so on and so forth. It's incorrect, to say the least.

The canon order of introduction actually has the numbering system make a reasonable amount of sense, minus the random skips in number that are partially the result of OSM factors the authors tried to allude to. You have, initially:

VF-1 Development starts 2002, deployed 2009
VF-2 SKIPPED1
VF-3 SKIPPED2
VF-4 Assigned to VF-X-4/YF-4 prototype, circa 2014-2015.
VF-5 SKIPPED3
VF-6 Development starts ~2015, deployed 2022.
VF-7 Assigned to VF-X-7 Beta prototype, development started 201?, field testing 2022.
VF-8 Poss. developed alongside VF-X-6/7, deployed sometime after 2022.
VF-9 ABERRANT, developed 2032+, deployed ~2039. (number possibly reserved in advance for program restart?)4
VF-10 ABERRANT, developed 202?, deployed 2029. (see above)

1. Due to the Macross OSM, in which the VF-X-2 was an unsuccessful rival prototype to the VF-X-1.
2. Due to the Macross OSM, in which the VF-X-3 was a rival prototype to the VF-X-4 for which development data was lost due to the destruction of Earth's surface.
3. Due to the MOSPEADA OSM, via the Robotech staff adapting the MOSPEADA AS-C03 Condor's backstory as being the non-transformable predecessor to the AFC-01 Legioss and AB-01 TLEAD into the Condor being a failed pre-Alpha/Beta prototype.
4. This is difficult to explain... as the official line is that the Beta concept was shelved and not revisited until at least 2032, after the introduction of the AGACs. It's possible that the developers of the final Beta requested the number be assigned before the project's start years later, or that the ASC skipped the number 9 due to some cultural context (unlucky numbers are sometimes skipped in a military designation system... 13 is often skipped in Western cultures, and 4 in East Asian cultures).


The answer is in Rifts Dimension Book 9. Oh, you cant reference it? Its because it was planned but never released...yet.

I see that being a similar reason why the VF-9 was deployed after the VF-10, which was rushed into final production due to war. The VF-9 was obviously designated prior to the conception of the AJACs project. I think your note 4 is a plausible reason why the Beta became the VF-9 ten years after the VF-10 was deployed. It makes sense that after the VF-7 failed, the engineers went back to the drawing board with the next number in mind (9)...the Logan was already being produced as the 8...although serious work was not started until after the Invid had occupied Earth and the needed the Beta to reclaim it.

Clearly the Logan and the Alpha were developed side by side, much like how the Navy produced the F-18 and the Air Force produced the F-16 side by side. At one point, the F-18 basic design was in competition with the F-16 for Air Force use, but was instead picked up as a Naval asset. I see that happening with the Logan and the Alpha as well.

_________________
I want to see from Palladium:
Updated Aug 2015
-Rifts: Dark Woods/Deep South, Space 110 PA, Scandinavia
-Mechanoids: Space (MDC)
-Robotech: Errata for Marines timeline, Masters Deluxe with SC and UEEF gear, Spaceships
-Updated Errata for post-2006 printings of Rifts books
-Searchable, quality PDFs/E-pubs of current Rifts titles


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Marine Book
Unread postPosted: Sun Oct 11, 2015 9:50 am
  

User avatar
Knight

Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2006 10:50 am
Posts: 6132
Location: WI
Seto wrote:
At this point, with Robotech functionally dead as a franchise, I don't think they'll bother... though the alleged mess is actually much less messy than you give it credit for being.

I can think of several ways to clear up the mess rather easy, but there is no way to tell officially if the lines have been reset at some point, or each "saga" does their own thing inso far as designation convention, or after a certain point the competing branches (for VFs) reserved odd/even numbers, or some actually follow a non-fighter numbering system (like the VFH-10 follows helicopter for ex), etc.

The 3 factions are supposed to be under the same umbrella, so it would make sense for them to have established a naming/designation convention, though it is possible each "service" has their own and not a uniform approach.

Seto wrote:
The canon order of introduction actually has the numbering system make a reasonable amount of sense, minus the random skips in number that are partially the result of OSM factors the authors tried to allude to. You have, initially:

Not really, both identified VF problems still remain.

the AGAC and Beta problem still remains. I will note that the Infopedia of 2002 did not have the AGAC/Beta issue, it was sometime after '02 that it developed.

Canon wise they do establish that the Logan is not part of the same generation as the Alpha. The Alpha is supposed to be 3rd Generation Veritech ("The Veritech Alpha Fighter is Earth's premier third-generation transformable fighter", the Logan is 2nd Generation Veritech ("The mecha of the Southern Cross were generally quite small, in comparison to preceding and successive generations of Earth mecha"). Both quotes are from the Infopedia entries for respective mecha just before it went belly up and go as far back as '02. So ASC mecha qualify as their own generation based on size.


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Marine Book
Unread postPosted: Sun Oct 11, 2015 4:26 pm
  

User avatar
Knight

Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 6:36 am
Posts: 5004
Location: New Frontier Shipyard, Earth-Moon L5
Comment: "My theories appall you, my heresies outrage you, I never answer letters, and you don't like my tie."
ShadowLogan wrote:
I can think of several ways to clear up the mess rather easy, but there is no way to tell officially if the lines have been reset at some point, or each "saga" does their own thing inso far as designation convention, or after a certain point the competing branches (for VFs) reserved odd/even numbers, or some actually follow a non-fighter numbering system (like the VFH-10 follows helicopter for ex), etc.

Contextually it's pretty obvious they're all part of the same numbering sequence, and that it isn't an even-odd thing.



ShadowLogan wrote:
The 3 factions are supposed to be under the same umbrella, so it would make sense for them to have established a naming/designation convention, though it is possible each "service" has their own and not a uniform approach.

This may be true for the ASC developments after the launch of the UEEF (like the non-transforming robots), but it seems to not be the case for the majority.



ShadowLogan wrote:
the AGAC and Beta problem still remains. I will note that the Infopedia of 2002 did not have the AGAC/Beta issue, it was sometime after '02 that it developed.

As I noted previously, the AGAC/Beta "problem" may not actually be a problem at all... it all depends on when the UEEF engineers applied to have a number assigned to the revival of the Beta fighter. If they did it before development started instead of using an internal code (since the military "state" has nationalized the means of production) that would easily explain the Beta receiving the lower number despite coming out after the rushed-into-service AGACs.



ShadowLogan wrote:
Canon wise they do establish that the Logan is not part of the same generation as the Alpha. The Alpha is supposed to be 3rd Generation Veritech ("The Veritech Alpha Fighter is Earth's premier third-generation transformable fighter", the Logan is 2nd Generation Veritech ("The mecha of the Southern Cross were generally quite small, in comparison to preceding and successive generations of Earth mecha"). Both quotes are from the Infopedia entries for respective mecha just before it went belly up and go as far back as '02. So ASC mecha qualify as their own generation based on size.

Yes, but their generational assignments are arbitrary and based on the old, now-false assumption that the mecha of each saga were developed and introduced in the same order that the sagas themselves came out... a view invalidated by Sentinels and various other sources which established that the Alpha fighter was decades old at the time of the New Generation.

_________________
Macross2.net - Home of the Macross Mecha Manual

Zer0 Kay wrote:
Damn you for anticipating my question. I've really got to unfoe you, your information is far more valuable than my sanity when dealing with your blunt callousness. :)


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Marine Book
Unread postPosted: Mon Oct 12, 2015 2:53 am
  

User avatar
Supreme Being

Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2000 1:01 am
Posts: 8549
Location: Unreality
Comment: Being a moderator doesn't mean I speak for Palladium Books. It just makes me the lifeguard at their pool.
It's not unknown for a development model to have a different designation than the final production variant. For example, Northrop developed the YF-17 Cobra for same contract that was won by the F-16. The YF-17 would eventually become the F/A-18 when adopted by the US Navy.

_________________
Official Hero of the Megaverse

Dead Boy wrote:
All hail Jefffar... King of the Mods

Co-Holder with Ice Dragon of the "Lando Calrissian" award for Smooth. - Novastar

Palladium Forums of the Megaverse Rules

If you need to contact Palladium Books for any reason, click here.


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Marine Book
Unread postPosted: Mon Oct 12, 2015 8:01 am
  

User avatar
Knight

Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2006 10:50 am
Posts: 6132
Location: WI
Seto wrote:
As I noted previously, the AGAC/Beta "problem" may not actually be a problem at all... it all depends on when the UEEF engineers applied to have a number assigned to the revival of the Beta fighter. If they did it before development started instead of using an internal code (since the military "state" has nationalized the means of production) that would easily explain the Beta receiving the lower number despite coming out after the rushed-into-service AGACs.


If the Beta-7 program is canceled in 20222, and given the AGAC was ready in 2029 with over 20units in "field evaluations" (ep37), and we know it can take several years to develop a VT (going off the Alpha and VF-1 known dates), then the Beta-9 would have to have been applied for almost as soon as the Beta-7 was canceled, which begs the question why cancel the Beta-7 in the first place when they could have just gone all VF-X-7B if the end result is essentially a mature "VF-X-7A"?

This though assumes the Helicopter function of the AGAC doesn't force the VT into a separate line sequence independent of Fighter/Attack. If it does it could indicate that there are 10 other VT Helicopters around in one form or another (prototypes, concepts, production).

Seto wrote:
Yes, but their generational assignments are arbitrary and based on the old, now-false assumption that the mecha of each saga were developed and introduced in the same order that the sagas themselves came out... a view invalidated by Sentinels and various other sources which established that the Alpha fighter was decades old at the time of the New Generation.


The assignments are arbitrary, but they seem to be done in such a way each was conceived independently and almost like they went TMS-NG-TRM in working this stuff out.

It is possible that the Alpha belongs to both generations if it was updated in that time span. The 2nd Gen Alphas from the 2010s could be smaller (even if ever so slightly) than the 2020-40s model since they likely had to make some alterations to address the range issue (which include connecting to the Beta).


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Marine Book
Unread postPosted: Mon Oct 12, 2015 9:44 am
  

User avatar
Adventurer

Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2004 9:34 pm
Posts: 652
Since Sentinels has been de-canonized, couldn't the "three generations" mindset be restored, making the Alpha a decade or two newer? Granted, that would involve equipping the early UEEF with Logans instead of Alphas; but would that really be such a bad thing?


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Marine Book
Unread postPosted: Mon Oct 12, 2015 10:43 am
  

User avatar
Knight

Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 6:36 am
Posts: 5004
Location: New Frontier Shipyard, Earth-Moon L5
Comment: "My theories appall you, my heresies outrage you, I never answer letters, and you don't like my tie."
Jefffar wrote:
It's not unknown for a development model to have a different designation than the final production variant. For example, Northrop developed the YF-17 Cobra for same contract that was won by the F-16. The YF-17 would eventually become the F/A-18 when adopted by the US Navy.

We're aware of that... the bone of contention here is that the Beta program was canned circa 2022 and allegedly not revived under the VF-X-9 designation until over ten years later, by which point the AGACs had already been developed and put into production as VF/H-10.





ShadowLogan wrote:
If the Beta-7 program is canceled in 2022, and given the AGAC was ready in 2029 with over 20units in "field evaluations" (ep37), and we know it can take several years to develop a VT (going off the Alpha and VF-1 known dates), then the Beta-9 would have to have been applied for almost as soon as the Beta-7 was canceled, which begs the question why cancel the Beta-7 in the first place when they could have just gone all VF-X-7B if the end result is essentially a mature "VF-X-7A"?

We know that it can take 7 or so years to develop a new VF from scratch, but the Beta may have been much faster since they were supposedly just resolving an originally-insurmountable issue with the existing design.

The change in designation is most likely a purely administrative/bureaucratic foible... the bean-counters in the UEEF's logistical wing may be treating the Beta program's revival as a new development program because the original project was cancelled (and probably had its remaining budget reallocated). The alternative would be that it's the Super Hornet in reverse... instead of disguising a much newer aircraft as an old one for appropriations reasons, reviving an old aircraft by renumbering it to pass it off as a new requisition.



ShadowLogan wrote:
This though assumes the Helicopter function of the AGAC doesn't force the VT into a separate line sequence independent of Fighter/Attack. If it does it could indicate that there are 10 other VT Helicopters around in one form or another (prototypes, concepts, production).

Thus far, I see no pressing evidence to suggest that it would belong to a different sequence... its designation at present places it in the Fighter sequence primarily, with Helicopter as a secondary.



ShadowLogan wrote:
The assignments are arbitrary, but they seem to be done in such a way each was conceived independently and almost like they went TMS-NG-TRM in working this stuff out.

Yes... the assignments of generation in the Infopedia are based on the older, pre-Sentinels view that the mecha seen in the Masters Saga were developed and produced BEFORE the mecha seen in the New Generation.

The post-Sentinels narrative material upon which the designations are based has been very clear and consistent on the New Generation's mecha having been developed before the Masters Saga's mecha.


The old view was:
1st Gen: Macross Saga
2nd Gen: Masters Saga
3rd Gen: New Generation

Based on the official material, it should be:
1st Gen: Macross Saga
2nd Gen: New Generation & Masters Saga
3rd Gen: ?



dataweaver wrote:
Since Sentinels has been de-canonized, couldn't the "three generations" mindset be restored, making the Alpha a decade or two newer? Granted, that would involve equipping the early UEEF with Logans instead of Alphas; but would that really be such a bad thing?

The specifics of the Sentinels story have been decanonized... the "broad strokes" of the arc still apply, and Harmony Gold's official information maintains that the Alpha had been the main UEEF fighter for decades at the time we see it in the show.

_________________
Macross2.net - Home of the Macross Mecha Manual

Zer0 Kay wrote:
Damn you for anticipating my question. I've really got to unfoe you, your information is far more valuable than my sanity when dealing with your blunt callousness. :)


Last edited by Seto Kaiba on Wed Oct 14, 2015 10:38 am, edited 1 time in total.

          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Marine Book
Unread postPosted: Tue Oct 13, 2015 7:17 am
  

User avatar
Champion

Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2000 1:01 am
Posts: 2678
Location: Dino Swamp (well...should be "underseas")
dataweaver wrote:
Since Sentinels has been de-canonized, couldn't the "three generations" mindset be restored, making the Alpha a decade or two newer? Granted, that would involve equipping the early UEEF with Logans instead of Alphas; but would that really be such a bad thing?


Sentinels still happened, just not the way McKinny said it did, or in the timeline he said it did, or the sequence of events like he said it did. We see elements of Sentinels, to include the Sentinel races themselves, in Prelude to the Shadow Chronicles. Additionally, certain key events of Sentinels (Breetai vs Regent, death of Edwards, implementation of shadow tech) and Sentinels specific characters (Jack Baker, Karen Penn) were all present, just not in the traditional sequence of events. Most of these happened in the 2043/44 time frame as opposed to the 2020's like McKinny had.

That being said, there is no reason why Logans wouldn't be present in the early UEEF missions along with older VF-1s for missions like the Robotech Relief Expedition (like Maj Carpenter was a part of). Remember, those ships (Tokugawas) started exploring the universe as early as 2010 (RT Infopedia), so Alphas would not have been available anyway. As Logans became available, I am sure they would replace the larger VF-1 series mecha as they got closer to end of life, but prior to the Alpha being the primary expeditionary fighter.

_________________
I want to see from Palladium:
Updated Aug 2015
-Rifts: Dark Woods/Deep South, Space 110 PA, Scandinavia
-Mechanoids: Space (MDC)
-Robotech: Errata for Marines timeline, Masters Deluxe with SC and UEEF gear, Spaceships
-Updated Errata for post-2006 printings of Rifts books
-Searchable, quality PDFs/E-pubs of current Rifts titles


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Marine Book
Unread postPosted: Tue Oct 13, 2015 8:14 am
  

User avatar
Knight

Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2006 10:50 am
Posts: 6132
Location: WI
Seto wrote:
We know that it can take 7 or so years to develop a new VF from scratch, but the Beta may have been much faster since they were supposedly just resolving an originally-insurmountable issue with the existing design.

True, but that does nothing to clear up the issue. If we assume 7years for the AGAC, which might be generous that means the AGAC numbering would have been assigned in 2022 given it was seen in 2029 (ep37). So a Beta revival would have to come about almost as soon as the Beta-7 was cancelled but also after the Logan assignment (which could go back farther than 2020). Given Lunk's unfamiliarity with the Beta-9 and his being present for the Invid Invasion, it would seem that the Beta-9 was conceived post Invid arrival otherwise as an Alpha mechanic he should have some knowledge of the Beta, even if it was only in development.

Seto wrote:
the bean-counters in the UEEF's logistical wing may be treating the Beta program's revival as a new development program because the original project was cancelled (and probably had its remaining budget reallocated). The alternative would be that it's the Super Hornet in reverse... instead of disguising a much newer aircraft as an old one for appropriations reasons, reviving an old aircraft by renumbering it to pass it off as a new requisition.

There is some real world precedent though for treating the revival as an extension of a cancelled program and staying within that program (ex. B-1 Lancer Bomber). Especially given that superficially there doesn't appear to be anything different about the Beta-7 and Beta-9 in the available animation. Which really makes the Beta-9 actually a Beta-7B, just with updated internal technology.

Seto wrote:
Thus far, I see no pressing evidence to suggest that it would belong to a different sequence... its designation at present places it in the Fighter sequence primarily, with Helicopter as a secondary.

Well the 2E RPG does open that possibility up with the AGAC program's XV/H-1 origins, so there could be other V/H-#s out there. Maybe not necessarily production/field models, but certainly development related articles.

Seto wrote:
The problem there is simply one of Infopedia-update apathy... or rather, as Tommy and Kevin put it, management's unwillingness to bother with anything that didn't bring in an immediate return on investment.

There is that apahty angle sure, but it could have been addressed in the 2E RPG (since there is a return on investment). And it certainly doesn't explain why the Alpha is still referred to as a 3rd Generation mecha in AotSC (pg79, again a return on investment) when they could have moved it back to 2nd generation technology, or even stated it being updated over the decades to go from 2nd to 3rd generation, with the Shadow Model being a 3.5gen design.


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Marine Book
Unread postPosted: Tue Oct 13, 2015 8:32 am
  

User avatar
Adventurer

Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2004 9:34 pm
Posts: 652
Kagashi wrote:
dataweaver wrote:
Since Sentinels has been de-canonized, couldn't the "three generations" mindset be restored, making the Alpha a decade or two newer? Granted, that would involve equipping the early UEEF with Logans instead of Alphas; but would that really be such a bad thing?


Sentinels still happened, just not the way McKinny said it did, or in the timeline he said it did, or the sequence of events like he said it did. We see elements of Sentinels, to include the Sentinel races themselves, in Prelude to the Shadow Chronicles. Additionally, certain key events of Sentinels (Breetai vs Regent, death of Edwards, implementation of shadow tech) and Sentinels specific characters (Jack Baker, Karen Penn) were all present, just not in the traditional sequence of events. Most of these happened in the 2043/44 time frame as opposed to the 2020's like McKinny had.
right. I'm suggesting that the alphas might be part of the "not the way McKinney said it did" bit: That is, I'm suggesting that the bit about that Alphas being produced in the 2022 timeframe originally came to be because of the original presentation of the Sentinels — specifically, Karen Penn being seen test-piloting an Alpha. If things didn't happen in quite the same way, or in the same sequence, or in the same timeframe, who's to say that Karen's test flight of an Alpha happened at all? Maybe she was testing a Logan instead, or maybe she tested an Alpha some time in the late 2030s.

The point is, with the decanonizing of the Sentinels (except in broad strokes), there's arguably no reason to think that the Alpha's timeline has to be as long as it was back when Yune was still assuming that it happened more or less as written, save for some minor tweaks.

Quote:
That being said, there is no reason why Logans wouldn't be present in the early UEEF missions along with older VF-1s for missions like the Robotech Relief Expedition (like Maj Carpenter was a part of). Remember, those ships (Tokugawas) started exploring the universe as early as 2010 (RT Infopedia), so Alphas would not have been available anyway. As Logans became available, I am sure they would replace the larger VF-1 series mecha as they got closer to end of life, but prior to the Alpha being the primary expeditionary fighter.
Right.


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Marine Book
Unread postPosted: Tue Oct 13, 2015 9:18 am
  

User avatar
Knight

Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 6:36 am
Posts: 5004
Location: New Frontier Shipyard, Earth-Moon L5
Comment: "My theories appall you, my heresies outrage you, I never answer letters, and you don't like my tie."
Kagashi wrote:
Remember, those ships (Tokugawas) started exploring the universe as early as 2010 (RT Infopedia), so Alphas would not have been available anyway.

The problem is that the Logan wasn't available back then either... they were doing it with some unspecified mecha, possibly VF-1's.

Depending on whether you're consulting canon or the RPG, the Logan is either a late 2010s introduction or a post-2022 introduction.



Kagashi wrote:
As Logans became available, I am sure they would replace the larger VF-1 series mecha as they got closer to end of life, but prior to the Alpha being the primary expeditionary fighter.

I doubt it... the Logan is woefully under-armed and lacking in operational versatility compared to the VF-1. The RPG may agree with this view, as the Marines book partially follows the old comic line that the Expeditionary Forces favored the VF-1 in the air and the Spartas on the ground.





ShadowLogan wrote:
Given Lunk's unfamiliarity with the Beta-9 and his being present for the Invid Invasion, it would seem that the Beta-9 was conceived post Invid arrival otherwise as an Alpha mechanic he should have some knowledge of the Beta, even if it was only in development.

Lunk was a grunt, there's no reason he would've been aware of the Beta prior to its introduction.



ShadowLogan wrote:
There is some real world precedent though for treating the revival as an extension of a cancelled program and staying within that program (ex. B-1 Lancer Bomber). Especially given that superficially there doesn't appear to be anything different about the Beta-7 and Beta-9 in the available animation. Which really makes the Beta-9 actually a Beta-7B, just with updated internal technology.

Essentially yes, but sometimes the bureaucrats do stupid things with the designation system... like the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, which isn't even actually a variant of the F/A-18.



ShadowLogan wrote:
There is that apahty angle sure, but it could have been addressed in the 2E RPG (since there is a return on investment).

The RPG isn't canon, though. Never was. Thus, not an ideal venue for such a change.



ShadowLogan wrote:
And it certainly doesn't explain why the Alpha is still referred to as a 3rd Generation mecha in AotSC (pg79, again a return on investment) when they could have moved it back to 2nd generation technology, or even stated it being updated over the decades to go from 2nd to 3rd generation, with the Shadow Model being a 3.5gen design.

The books went with whatever official information they could copy-paste from the OSM and from the Infopedia. It's hardly the most severe continuity problem, even just within the Alpha's article... as we have previously discussed.

Generally speaking, though, one fighter design doesn't go from being a "Gen X" to "Gen X+1". An upgrade may take it to "Gen X+.5", but you wouldn't see something skipping generations like that.

Realistically, the Alpha is a 2nd Generation fighter and, if there was an established plan to make shadow technology part of the next generation fighter (no confirmation of this in the absence of the Gamma fighter) it could be said to be a Generation 2.5 fighter.

_________________
Macross2.net - Home of the Macross Mecha Manual

Zer0 Kay wrote:
Damn you for anticipating my question. I've really got to unfoe you, your information is far more valuable than my sanity when dealing with your blunt callousness. :)


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Marine Book
Unread postPosted: Wed Oct 14, 2015 7:22 am
  

User avatar
Champion

Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2000 1:01 am
Posts: 2678
Location: Dino Swamp (well...should be "underseas")
Seto Kaiba wrote:
Kagashi wrote:
Remember, those ships (Tokugawas) started exploring the universe as early as 2010 (RT Infopedia), so Alphas would not have been available anyway.

The problem is that the Logan wasn't available back then either... they were doing it with some unspecified mecha, possibly VF-1's.

Depending on whether you're consulting canon or the RPG, the Logan is either a late 2010s introduction or a post-2022 introduction.


RT.com does not really help in terms of timeline for the Logan. Best I have would be the RPG, and Wildstorm seems to ignore the Masters Saga, so there is little to work with. That being said, the RPG would be the best tier to base canon off of for the Logan's timeline IMHO.



Seto Kaiba wrote:
Kagashi wrote:
As Logans became available, I am sure they would replace the larger VF-1 series mecha as they got closer to end of life, but prior to the Alpha being the primary expeditionary fighter.

I doubt it... the Logan is woefully under-armed and lacking in operational versatility compared to the VF-1. The RPG may agree with this view, as the Marines book partially follows the old comic line that the Expeditionary Forces favored the VF-1 in the air and the Spartas on the ground.


Sometimes you dont have a choice. Case in point, according to the RPG, they simply do not make EP-37s anymore and soldiers are running around with Valiants now. No matter what timeline you use as canon, at some point, factories were retooled to make Logans. With the limited resources of Earth after the RoD, I doubt they continued to make Zentraedi sized VF-1s (and/or parts) with those factories. Eventually, those VF-1s would reach an end of service life and be retired as newer aircraft were produced, regardless of pilot preference.

The Logan isnt necessarily worse than a VF-1, its just different; that being said, yes, I agree, the VF-1 is superior to the Logan, but again, economics and logistics might dictate that you may not have a choice. The United States War Department/Department of Defense has historically replaced superior weapon systems with inferior ones in intra-war periods for various reasons. When the next war comes out, they scramble to find something that works to win the war, realizing it was a dumb mistake (like the AJACs). The idea of the Logan production and life cycle in RT works quite well with historic examples.

_________________
I want to see from Palladium:
Updated Aug 2015
-Rifts: Dark Woods/Deep South, Space 110 PA, Scandinavia
-Mechanoids: Space (MDC)
-Robotech: Errata for Marines timeline, Masters Deluxe with SC and UEEF gear, Spaceships
-Updated Errata for post-2006 printings of Rifts books
-Searchable, quality PDFs/E-pubs of current Rifts titles


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Marine Book
Unread postPosted: Wed Oct 14, 2015 8:12 am
  

User avatar
Knight

Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2006 10:50 am
Posts: 6132
Location: WI
Seto wrote:
Lunk was a grunt, there's no reason he would've been aware of the Beta prior to its introduction.

That depends on how much integration was needs to be done for the Alpha to use the Beta though. For someone to maintain the Alpha completely like Lunk has to do, he had to have come across some references to the Beta.

Seto wrote:
The RPG isn't canon, though. Never was. Thus, not an ideal venue for such a change.

If the effort though is to have it stick as close to canon as possible though, it would still be a venue to test the waters at least to get some fan reaction before moving it out in a more official capacity.

Seto wrote:
The books went with whatever official information they could copy-paste from the OSM and from the Infopedia. It's hardly the most severe continuity problem, even just within the Alpha's article... as we have previously discussed.

True, but if they are looking for a place to update material and get a return on investment these would be places to do it in. They want some level of editorial review/control so they could go "no this changed to...".

Seto wrote:
Generally speaking, though, one fighter design doesn't go from being a "Gen X" to "Gen X+1". An upgrade may take it to "Gen X+.5", but you wouldn't see something skipping generations like that.

That though depends on what the defining characteristics are of a given generation though. And in that matter we have nothing actually, except open speculation.


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Marine Book
Unread postPosted: Wed Oct 14, 2015 10:12 am
  

User avatar
Knight

Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 6:36 am
Posts: 5004
Location: New Frontier Shipyard, Earth-Moon L5
Comment: "My theories appall you, my heresies outrage you, I never answer letters, and you don't like my tie."
Kagashi wrote:
RT.com does not really help in terms of timeline for the Logan. Best I have would be the RPG, and Wildstorm seems to ignore the Masters Saga, so there is little to work with. That being said, the RPG would be the best tier to base canon off of for the Logan's timeline IMHO.

The RPG is arguably the worst possible source to use as a basis for canon. It plays fast and loose with the timeline and the setting, and while 2nd Edition improved it somewhat its accuracy and consistency still leave much to be desired WRT the official setting... much of that being the unavoidable concessions that must be made to convert so focused a story into a game that isn't on rails.

(Sufficed to say, there is a VERY good reason that Harmony Gold doesn't consider the RPG canon.)



Kagashi wrote:
Sometimes you dont have a choice.

But in both the RPG and the only depiction of Sentinels to be directly referenced by a canon source, they DID have a choice... and the choice they made was the obvious one to continue using the VF-1 over much less capable alternatives like the Logan or the Conbat. The Marines book establishes that they didn't retire the VF-1 fleet until the Beta fighter was introduced.



Kagashi wrote:
Case in point, according to the RPG, they simply do not make EP-37s anymore and soldiers are running around with Valiants now.

Whether that's actually accurate is a whole other matter... the RPG is known to be unreliable when it comes to details like this, as they're not basing it on any actual source.



Kagashi wrote:
No matter what timeline you use as canon, at some point, factories were retooled to make Logans. With the limited resources of Earth after the RoD, I doubt they continued to make Zentraedi sized VF-1s (and/or parts) with those factories. Eventually, those VF-1s would reach an end of service life and be retired as newer aircraft were produced, regardless of pilot preference.

Correction... the UEDF and UEEF logistical chains were/are separate, so the UEDF retooling its factories does not affect the UEEF's ability to produce whatever it bloody well wants in the multiple factory satellites it canonically controls. That would tend to make the question of "limited resources" largely academic for the UEEF.



Kagashi wrote:
The Logan isnt necessarily worse than a VF-1, its just different; that being said, yes, I agree, the VF-1 is superior to the Logan, but again, economics and logistics might dictate that you may not have a choice.

But we know they had no problem keeping large numbers of VF-1's in service until the late 2030s in the RPG's version of events... and the older Sentinels material indicates the UEEF maintained a significant VF-1 presence right up until the comic was canceled.

The UEDF did its own thing, though the RPG suggests the reason they did was because Leonard was upset at the UEEF taking priority in acquisitions.






ShadowLogan wrote:
That depends on how much integration was needs to be done for the Alpha to use the Beta though. For someone to maintain the Alpha completely like Lunk has to do, he had to have come across some references to the Beta.

But not necessarily in detail. You don't need to know all the particulars of how an external module works to maintain the interface hardware.



ShadowLogan wrote:
If the effort though is to have it stick as close to canon as possible though, it would still be a venue to test the waters at least to get some fan reaction before moving it out in a more official capacity.

... that assumes that the creative staff are interested in tailoring their changes to the setting based on fan feedback.

_________________
Macross2.net - Home of the Macross Mecha Manual

Zer0 Kay wrote:
Damn you for anticipating my question. I've really got to unfoe you, your information is far more valuable than my sanity when dealing with your blunt callousness. :)


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Marine Book
Unread postPosted: Thu Oct 15, 2015 8:37 am
  

User avatar
Knight

Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2006 10:50 am
Posts: 6132
Location: WI
Seto wrote:
Correction... the UEDF and UEEF logistical chains were/are separate, so the UEDF retooling its factories does not affect the UEEF's ability to produce whatever it bloody well wants in the multiple factory satellites it canonically controls. That would tend to make the question of "limited resources" largely academic for the UEEF.

At some point they became separate, likely post Invid Invasion. There is no reason that the UEDF could not be in control of one of the factory satellites captured, or make use of said facility. The UEDF and UEEF are in contact with each other, and they can certainly "trade" between Earth, Moon Base, the various Factory Satellites (including SSL, which in 2029 appears to be w/n the Solar System), and what ever outposts exist in the solar system and beyond.

Seto wrote:
But we know they had no problem keeping large numbers of VF-1's in service until the late 2030s in the RPG's version of events... and the older Sentinels material indicates the UEEF maintained a significant VF-1 presence right up until the comic was canceled.

That doesn't mean the UEEF could not have problems keeping the VF-1 in service. It should also be noted that the earlier Sentinels material may be working with a completely different timeline than what the 2E RPG (and Yune-verse) works off of.

Seto wrote:
he UEDF did its own thing, though the RPG suggests the reason they did was because Leonard was upset at the UEEF taking priority in acquisitions.

Even if the UEEF takes priority in acquisitions, the UEDF:ASC would have to set up production lines for all this new equipment they went and did their own thing with, when they could have just as easily set up additional facilities for the UEDF:ASC since they had to do that anyway for the UEDF:ASC's "new" stuff. Leonard did not have to go off and do his own thing.

Seto wrote:
But not necessarily in detail. You don't need to know all the particulars of how an external module works to maintain the interface hardware.

True, but he would then have knowledge that said external module exists.

Seto wrote:
... that assumes that the creative staff are interested in tailoring their changes to the setting based on fan feedback.

True, but if they are changing things around they might want to still experiment in a non-canon way before making it canon.


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Marine Book
Unread postPosted: Thu Oct 15, 2015 10:45 am
  

User avatar
Knight

Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 6:36 am
Posts: 5004
Location: New Frontier Shipyard, Earth-Moon L5
Comment: "My theories appall you, my heresies outrage you, I never answer letters, and you don't like my tie."
ShadowLogan wrote:
At some point they became separate, likely post Invid Invasion. There is no reason that the UEDF could not be in control of one of the factory satellites captured, or make use of said facility. The UEDF and UEEF are in contact with each other, and they can certainly "trade" between Earth, Moon Base, the various Factory Satellites (including SSL, which in 2029 appears to be w/n the Solar System), and what ever outposts exist in the solar system and beyond.

If there was actual contact between them during that time... but based on the series, it would appear that non-"radio" contact with the Expeditionary Forces was quite rare.



ShadowLogan wrote:
That doesn't mean the UEEF could not have problems keeping the VF-1 in service. It should also be noted that the earlier Sentinels material may be working with a completely different timeline than what the 2E RPG (and Yune-verse) works off of.

True, but it also doesn't mean that they did have problems keeping the VF-1 in service.



ShadowLogan wrote:
Even if the UEEF takes priority in acquisitions, the UEDF:ASC would have to set up production lines for all this new equipment they went and did their own thing with, when they could have just as easily set up additional facilities for the UEDF:ASC since they had to do that anyway for the UEDF:ASC's "new" stuff. Leonard did not have to go off and do his own thing.

But he did anyway... and it didn't end well.



ShadowLogan wrote:
Seto wrote:
But not necessarily in detail. You don't need to know all the particulars of how an external module works to maintain the interface hardware.

True, but he would then have knowledge that said external module exists.

He could/would have knowledge that AN external module exists... ordinarily if you don't have an immediate need-to-know as to how a particular piece of equipment works, you get a black box diagram instead of a detailed specification. It's likely that that would be how the Beta's existence would've been presented to Lunk and the others who were lost in the field before the Beta's introduction.

No specifics... just maintenance instructions for the docking system and the "black box" of the craft that would connect there.



ShadowLogan wrote:
Seto wrote:
... that assumes that the creative staff are interested in tailoring their changes to the setting based on fan feedback.

True, but if they are changing things around they might want to still experiment in a non-canon way before making it canon.

In theory it sounds like a good idea, but you know as well as I that there are almost as many opinions of how it "should be" as there are Robotech fans these days... IMO it's doubtful they'd get any useful feedback.

_________________
Macross2.net - Home of the Macross Mecha Manual

Zer0 Kay wrote:
Damn you for anticipating my question. I've really got to unfoe you, your information is far more valuable than my sanity when dealing with your blunt callousness. :)


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Marine Book
Unread postPosted: Thu Oct 15, 2015 12:00 pm
  

User avatar
Knight

Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2006 10:50 am
Posts: 6132
Location: WI
Seto wrote:
f there was actual contact between them during that time... but based on the series, it would appear that non-"radio" contact with the Expeditionary Forces was quite rare.

But still not non-existant. That is also in the 2029 frame the series actually depicts, during the 2014-2028 period it might look different since the series doesn't directly address the period in question.

Seto wrote:
True, but it also doesn't mean that they did have problems keeping the VF-1 in service.

Yes, but we also have to remember they would be experiencing loss due to attrition. SLEPs can only go so far, the Conbat was difficult to maintain into the 2030s and it is younger than the VF-1.

Seto wrote:
No specifics... just maintenance instructions for the docking system and the "black box" of the craft that would connect there.

I don't expect Lunk to know it by sight or anything like that. But knowing the system exists and encountering it should not have generated the response he gave in Ep70 I would think.

Lunk Ep70: its a new type of fighter I've never seen before its great if we can attach this thing to the back of the alpha fighter it will make it even stronger its called a aaa (moves to look up the name, which Scott provides by cutting him off)

That Lunk had to go look up the name would suggest he doesn't even know the name. It is possible the Alpha has universal docking system, which would make some sense given the ease they had integrating the Beta, though the question would have to be asked what it was for given it wasn't a factor for the Horizon docking station. The Beta itself is bloated for the Alpha's need of a booster (40/56 SRMs blocked, 5 heavy guns go unused, a rarely used bombay/hardpoints, pilot station, if we got rid of all this, we could probably shrink the booster down to a "broomstick" instead of an oversized heavy duty backpack, with the same booster range and likely offer increased atmospheric performance)

Seto wrote:
In theory it sounds like a good idea, but you know as well as I that there are almost as many opinions of how it "should be" as there are Robotech fans these days... IMO it's doubtful they'd get any useful feedback.


I think they could get some useful feedback, the question is how they interpret that feedback. Look at the old Manga/Regular-size poll and how they counted the "no preference" to mean "manga".


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Marine Book
Unread postPosted: Thu Oct 15, 2015 3:05 pm
  

User avatar
Adventurer

Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2004 9:34 pm
Posts: 652
Bear in mind that the Pioneer Mission didn't launch until 2022; segregation between UEEF and UEDF manufacturing before that is not a sure thing.

Given that the meta-reason why the Alpha ended up in production before the SDF-3 left was that the VF series was off-limits for legal reasons and the ASC was the series' red-headed stepchild and tended to get short shrift, I think it's very plausible that in a “Sentinels in broad strokes only” continuity, VF-series Veritechs remained in UEEF service throughout most of the 20s. Heck, notwithstanding the LLA Legioss sighting, my inclination would be to push the Alphas into the late 2030s and the Betas into the early 2040s. Maybe the fighter seen in the flashback from Colonel Wolfe's episode can be designated the VF-2, and it can be something that was featured in the early UEEF designs.


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Marine Book
Unread postPosted: Fri Oct 16, 2015 3:45 am
  

User avatar
Adventurer

Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2004 7:52 am
Posts: 793
Location: Baltimore, Md
ShadowLogan wrote:
The Beta itself is bloated for the Alpha's need of a booster (40/56 SRMs blocked, 5 heavy guns go unused, a rarely used bombay/hardpoints, pilot station, if we got rid of all this, we could probably shrink the booster down to a "broomstick" instead of an oversized heavy duty backpack, with the same booster range and likely offer increased atmospheric performance).


For my group, we accepted the TREAD as being the original booster for the Alpha. We used the stats that Kenneth Olson wrote up, which pretty much made the TREAD a cut down Beta.

_________________
Moderator 3 of 6, Rec.Games.Mecha Newsgroup for Robot Games Discussion.
10th Lyran Guards, The Revenants.
Image


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Marine Book
Unread postPosted: Fri Oct 16, 2015 7:08 am
  

User avatar
Champion

Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2000 1:01 am
Posts: 2678
Location: Dino Swamp (well...should be "underseas")
devillin wrote:
ShadowLogan wrote:
The Beta itself is bloated for the Alpha's need of a booster (40/56 SRMs blocked, 5 heavy guns go unused, a rarely used bombay/hardpoints, pilot station, if we got rid of all this, we could probably shrink the booster down to a "broomstick" instead of an oversized heavy duty backpack, with the same booster range and likely offer increased atmospheric performance).


For my group, we accepted the TREAD as being the original booster for the Alpha. We used the stats that Kenneth Olson wrote up, which pretty much made the TREAD a cut down Beta.


That is what I am using for the VF-7 as well

_________________
I want to see from Palladium:
Updated Aug 2015
-Rifts: Dark Woods/Deep South, Space 110 PA, Scandinavia
-Mechanoids: Space (MDC)
-Robotech: Errata for Marines timeline, Masters Deluxe with SC and UEEF gear, Spaceships
-Updated Errata for post-2006 printings of Rifts books
-Searchable, quality PDFs/E-pubs of current Rifts titles


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Marine Book
Unread postPosted: Fri Oct 16, 2015 11:51 am
  

User avatar
Knight

Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 6:36 am
Posts: 5004
Location: New Frontier Shipyard, Earth-Moon L5
Comment: "My theories appall you, my heresies outrage you, I never answer letters, and you don't like my tie."
ShadowLogan wrote:
Yes, but we also have to remember they would be experiencing loss due to attrition. SLEPs can only go so far, the Conbat was difficult to maintain into the 2030s and it is younger than the VF-1.

The Conbat was difficult to maintain because it was ill-suited to the kind of enemies that the UEEF were fighting... that's different.



ShadowLogan wrote:
I think they could get some useful feedback, the question is how they interpret that feedback. Look at the old Manga/Regular-size poll and how they counted the "no preference" to mean "manga".

That's different. There was a practical reason for not wanting manga size... reworking the setting again has no monetary benefits.



dataweaver wrote:
Bear in mind that the Pioneer Mission didn't launch until 2022; segregation between UEEF and UEDF manufacturing before that is not a sure thing.

The substance of the old Sentinels "movie", the various other old depictions, and Leonard's stated reasons for being upset at having been left behind in the RPG do argue strongly in favor of there having been a logistical or adminstratively-induced wall between UEDF and UEEF appropriations.


ShadowLogan wrote:
Given that the meta-reason why the Alpha ended up in production before the SDF-3 left was that the VF series was off-limits for legal reasons and the ASC was the series' red-headed stepchild and tended to get short shrift, I think it's very plausible that in a “Sentinels in broad strokes only” continuity, VF-series Veritechs remained in UEEF service throughout most of the 20s.

The Macross designs were only off-the-table for legal reasons in the failed Sentinels TV series... comic books, which are legally merchandise for the franchise, had/have no such impediment and did freely depict the UEEF as having extensively used VF-1 Valkyries the same way the RPG asserts they did.

_________________
Macross2.net - Home of the Macross Mecha Manual

Zer0 Kay wrote:
Damn you for anticipating my question. I've really got to unfoe you, your information is far more valuable than my sanity when dealing with your blunt callousness. :)


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Marine Book
Unread postPosted: Fri Oct 16, 2015 12:15 pm
  

User avatar
Adventurer

Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2004 9:34 pm
Posts: 652
Seto Kaiba wrote:
dataweaver wrote:
Bear in mind that the Pioneer Mission didn't launch until 2022; segregation between UEEF and UEDF manufacturing before that is not a sure thing.
The substance of the old Sentinels "movie", the various other old depictions, and Leonard's stated reasons for being upset at having been left behind in the RPG do argue strongly in favor of there having been a logistical or adminstratively-induced wall between UEDF and UEEF appropriations.
But now that all but that last bit about Leonard have been “decanonized” to the status of only being true in the broad strokes, they're arguably no longer valid references in terms of how things ought to be.

Seto Kaiba wrote:
dataweaver wrote:
Given that the meta-reason why the Alpha ended up in production before the SDF-3 left was that the VF series was off-limits for legal reasons and the ASC was the series' red-headed stepchild and tended to get short shrift, I think it's very plausible that in a “Sentinels in broad strokes only” continuity, VF-series Veritechs remained in UEEF service throughout most of the 20s.

The Macross designs were only off-the-table for legal reasons in the failed Sentinels TV series... comic books, which are legally merchandise for the franchise, had/have no such impediment and did freely depict the UEEF as having extensively used VF-1 Valkyries the same way the RPG asserts they did.
We're agreed on the VF stuff. The question is when Alphas went into production. With the decanonization of the Sentinels, the only thing still supporting a pre-2022 early production of the Alpha is historical inertia.


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Marine Book
Unread postPosted: Fri Oct 16, 2015 9:51 pm
  

Hero

Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2008 4:20 pm
Posts: 912
dataweaver wrote:
In that regard, I'd be perfectly happy applying the Robotech 1e Destroid names to the Expeditionary Force Marines Destroids — mostly. After raiding the naming thread on this forum, I'd go with:

• Raidar X instead of Defender (Rifleman is taken by the VR-011 Cyclone)
• Excalibur instead of Tomahawk (the new one even has a blade!)
• Gladiator instead of Spartan
• Longbow instead of Phalanx (calling it a Spartan would just lead to all sorts of confusion)
• Behemoth instead of Monster (M.A.C. II never set well with me)


I like this...now only if we could do something about the art.

_________________
I know it is a little extreme to advocate the death penalty for stupidity...but can't we just remove all the warning labels and let nature take it's course???


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Marine Book
Unread postPosted: Sat Oct 17, 2015 9:16 am
  

User avatar
Knight

Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2006 10:50 am
Posts: 6132
Location: WI
Seto wrote:
The Conbat was difficult to maintain because it was ill-suited to the kind of enemies that the UEEF were fighting... that's different.

I agree that is part of the reason, but the UEEF could have retired it sooner and moved toward a newer more capable design or came up with a retro-fit to increase survivability (likely looking at equivalent of point-defense-turrets). It should be noted that new Conbat/Condor production went into the 2030s, we can't say that about the VF-1 which by all indications re-manufactured all A/Js into R standard pointing toward a production stoppage before the R standard was introduced.

Seto wrote:
That's different. There was a practical reason for not wanting manga size... reworking the setting again has no monetary benefits.

We are talking about fan feedback being used by HG to make a decission, which shouldn't matter if it has direct monetary benefits or not. They had fan feedback and misinterpreted that feedback by skewing the results to justify a desired result.


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Marine Book
Unread postPosted: Sun Oct 18, 2015 3:44 am
  

Dungeon Crawler

Joined: Sat Jul 06, 2013 1:04 am
Posts: 304
Seto Kaiba wrote:
The Macross designs were only off-the-table for legal reasons in the failed Sentinels TV series... comic books, which are legally merchandise for the franchise, had/have no such impediment and did freely depict the UEEF as having extensively used VF-1 Valkyries the same way the RPG asserts they did.


The problme is that if you suddenly have a run away hit with that comic... what can you then do? the fact that VF-1s are dicy for any part of the Franchise, let alone the cartoon part, makes them more or less poison for every other part.


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Marine Book
Unread postPosted: Sun Oct 18, 2015 5:13 am
  

User avatar
Adventurer

Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2004 9:34 pm
Posts: 652
Are we not talking about the new marine book anymore?


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Marine Book
Unread postPosted: Sun Oct 18, 2015 9:33 am
  

User avatar
Champion

Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2000 1:01 am
Posts: 2678
Location: Dino Swamp (well...should be "underseas")
dataweaver wrote:
Are we not talking about the new marine book anymore?


While we are tactically veering away somewhat, so far all the topics have been strategically related to what *should* have been in the book. Things like how long the VF-1 was used by the UEEF or what was the VF-7 could have been covered by this book since it covered that time period. Instead we got reprints of mecha from the core book (which you need to play the game anyway), and reprints from an earlier Jackson book (inorganics)....and no updates to those reprints to make it fit with the new material which contradicts it. Which is why I have not requested to thread to be locked. This book was so bad.

_________________
I want to see from Palladium:
Updated Aug 2015
-Rifts: Dark Woods/Deep South, Space 110 PA, Scandinavia
-Mechanoids: Space (MDC)
-Robotech: Errata for Marines timeline, Masters Deluxe with SC and UEEF gear, Spaceships
-Updated Errata for post-2006 printings of Rifts books
-Searchable, quality PDFs/E-pubs of current Rifts titles


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Marine Book
Unread postPosted: Sun Oct 18, 2015 11:11 am
  

User avatar
Adventurer

Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2004 9:34 pm
Posts: 652
OK. Bearing in mind that we're talking about what belongs in an RPG supplement, and not other media like comic books, TV series, or movies:
RtSC p.65 wrote:
By 2017, the plans for the final production prototype had been drafted, and in 2020, the new experimental Veritech, by now called the YF/A-6 Alpha, entered flight testing. The Alpha was thoroughly impressive to the United Earth Expeditionary Force, which quickly developed the Beta Fighter as an attachment, but development problems ensued as a result of overly ambitious design. Production runs were limited to small numbers almost exclusively for the UEEF for several years until it went into mass production in 2031.
RtSC p.75 wrote:
Tested as early as 2022 as the VF-X-7 and designed to replace the Conbat, the Beta was initially shelved due to design problems and a failure of then-current technology to deliver the kind of performance that the UEEF needed. …

By 2035, the renewed need for a modular, reusable booster pack for the Alpha Fighter was made abundantly clear. … The X-7 was now found to be viable due to technological advancements and was put into testing in early 2036.

So the Alpha was the exception rather than the rule until 2031, and the Beta didn't hit testing until 2036. So prior to 2031, what was the UEEF's mainstay veritech design? Arguably, the VF series filled that role at least until 2020; though it's possible that the Logan supplanted it when it went into full production in the Fall of 2018 (per the Masters Saga Sourcebook). Possible, but unlikely given Leonard's attitude.

So most likely the mainstay continued to be a VF-series Veritech, which could have been anything from the VF-1 to a hypothetical VF-3 (as the YF-4 Lightning never made it past the prototype stage, and design emphasis shifted to the Alpha after that). The Marine Sourcebook could have given us a new VF-series Veritech to cover, say, 2015–2031; it could have said that the VF-1 remained the mainstay until the Alphas went into full production in 2031; or it could have said that the Logan took over for the Valkyrie from 2018–2031. Any of the three would be consistent with what Shadow Chronicles tells us about the history of the Alpha. The notion that the UEEF was making widespread use of the Alpha prior to 2031 is not consistent with tSC.


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Marine Book
Unread postPosted: Sun Oct 18, 2015 1:20 pm
  

User avatar
Knight

Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2007 4:09 am
Posts: 4591
dataweaver wrote:
OK. Bearing in mind that we're talking about what belongs in an RPG supplement, and not other media like comic books, TV series, or movies:
RtSC p.65 wrote:
By 2017, the plans for the final production prototype had been drafted, and in 2020, the new experimental Veritech, by now called the YF/A-6 Alpha, entered flight testing. The Alpha was thoroughly impressive to the United Earth Expeditionary Force, which quickly developed the Beta Fighter as an attachment, but development problems ensued as a result of overly ambitious design. Production runs were limited to small numbers almost exclusively for the UEEF for several years until it went into mass production in 2031.
RtSC p.75 wrote:
Tested as early as 2022 as the VF-X-7 and designed to replace the Conbat, the Beta was initially shelved due to design problems and a failure of then-current technology to deliver the kind of performance that the UEEF needed. …

By 2035, the renewed need for a modular, reusable booster pack for the Alpha Fighter was made abundantly clear. … The X-7 was now found to be viable due to technological advancements and was put into testing in early 2036.

So the Alpha was the exception rather than the rule until 2031, and the Beta didn't hit testing until 2036. So prior to 2031, what was the UEEF's mainstay veritech design? Arguably, the VF series filled that role at least until 2020; though it's possible that the Logan supplanted it when it went into full production in the Fall of 2018 (per the Masters Saga Sourcebook). Possible, but unlikely given Leonard's attitude.

So most likely the mainstay continued to be a VF-series Veritech, which could have been anything from the VF-1 to a hypothetical VF-3 (as the YF-4 Lightning never made it past the prototype stage, and design emphasis shifted to the Alpha after that). The Marine Sourcebook could have given us a new VF-series Veritech to cover, say, 2015–2031; it could have said that the VF-1 remained the mainstay until the Alphas went into full production in 2031; or it could have said that the Logan took over for the Valkyrie from 2018–2031. Any of the three would be consistent with what Shadow Chronicles tells us about the history of the Alpha. The notion that the UEEF was making widespread use of the Alpha prior to 2031 is not consistent with tSC.


How's about a VF-1R+ with more upgrades (or SLEP II)?

_________________
They can't see me...Right!?


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Marine Book
Unread postPosted: Sun Oct 18, 2015 3:10 pm
  

User avatar
Rifts® Trivia Master

Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2003 3:37 pm
Posts: 13061
Location: Missouri
if we could use it, i'd go with a the old 1st ed "super logan" .. fluff it as being kinda like the Super hornet, in that it was designed to use common parts, but be bigger and offer more capabilities. then you could have both Logans and 'super logans' in use by both the UEEF and ASC (perhaps with two different engine set ups.. PC for the UEEF, SLMH for the ASC)

this would give us an extra VF for both groups, and give the ASC a decent ground attack VF prior to the Ajax.

_________________
Author of Rifts: Deep Frontier (Rifter 70)
Author of Rifts:Scandinavia (current project)
Image
* All fantasy should have a solid base in reality.
* Good sense about trivialities is better than nonsense about things that matter.

-Max Beerbohm
Visit my Website


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Marine Book
Unread postPosted: Sun Oct 18, 2015 3:12 pm
  

User avatar
Knight

Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2007 4:09 am
Posts: 4591
glitterboy2098 wrote:
if we could use it, i'd go with a the old 1st ed "super logan" .. fluff it as being kinda like the Super hornet, in that it was designed to use common parts, but be bigger and offer more capabilities. then you could have both Logans and 'super logans' in use by both the UEEF and ASC (perhaps with two different engine set ups.. PC for the UEEF, SLMH for the ASC)

this would give us an extra VF for both groups, and give the ASC a decent ground attack VF prior to the Ajax.


That could work also...give it a modular power plant and engines?

_________________
They can't see me...Right!?


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Marine Book
Unread postPosted: Sun Oct 18, 2015 3:34 pm
  

User avatar
Rifts® Trivia Master

Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2003 3:37 pm
Posts: 13061
Location: Missouri
modular could work. so could just two designation codes and seperate variants.
so for example, the UEEF version is the VF-8D1, and the ASC version the D2 or something.

i'd be wary of modular myself because then we'd have people insisting they can refit their Alpha's and Beta's to SLMH power. when it seems somewhat unlikely that you could do that without major redesign. after all, SLMH units appear to require a lot more fuel storage (suggesting much higher fuel consumption) and their powerplants work differently. (on a PC unit you basically have a generator tied into some plasma rockets. with SLMH your generator and the rocket are the usually the same thing)

_________________
Author of Rifts: Deep Frontier (Rifter 70)
Author of Rifts:Scandinavia (current project)
Image
* All fantasy should have a solid base in reality.
* Good sense about trivialities is better than nonsense about things that matter.

-Max Beerbohm
Visit my Website


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Marine Book
Unread postPosted: Sun Oct 18, 2015 3:44 pm
  

User avatar
Priest

Joined: Tue Sep 02, 2003 8:19 pm
Posts: 43061
Location: Somewhere between Heaven, Hell, and New England
glitterboy2098 wrote:
modular could work. so could just two designation codes and seperate variants.
so for example, the UEEF version is the VF-8D1, and the ASC version the D2 or something.

i'd be wary of modular myself because then we'd have people insisting they can refit their Alpha's and Beta's to SLMH power. when it seems somewhat unlikely that you could do that without major redesign. after all, SLMH units appear to require a lot more fuel storage (suggesting much higher fuel consumption) and their powerplants work differently. (on a PC unit you basically have a generator tied into some plasma rockets. with SLMH your generator and the rocket are the usually the same thing)



"Damnit! You can't just 'plug and play'! You have to re-calculate weight and lift ratios, and the fuel needs to be cooled differently, and...bugger..find yourself another mechanic!!"

_________________
-------------
"Trouble rather the Tiger in his Lair,
Than the Sage among his Books,
For all the Empires and Kingdoms,
The Armies and Works that you hold Dear,
Are to him but the Playthings of the Moment,
To be turned over with the Flick of a Finger,
And the Turning of a Page"

--------Rudyard Kipling
------------


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Marine Book
Unread postPosted: Sun Oct 18, 2015 3:58 pm
  

Knight

Joined: Fri Jan 03, 2003 2:01 am
Posts: 4256
Location: Québec
What do you think of the Aliens in it?


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Marine Book
Unread postPosted: Sun Oct 18, 2015 4:28 pm
  

User avatar
Adventurer

Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2004 9:34 pm
Posts: 652
glitterboy2098 wrote:
if we could use it, i'd go with a the old 1st ed "super logan" .. fluff it as being kinda like the Super hornet, in that it was designed to use common parts, but be bigger and offer more capabilities. then you could have both Logans and 'super logans' in use by both the UEEF and ASC (perhaps with two different engine set ups.. PC for the UEEF, SLMH for the ASC)

this would give us an extra VF for both groups, and give the ASC a decent ground attack VF prior to the Ajax.
Personal opinion: the last thing the 2015–2030 era needs is yet another mecha design that incorporates Alpha parts into a non-Alpha design — especially since the question at hand is “what filled the role before the Alpha did?”

If there's a Super-Logan design for this timeframe, it needs a visual redesign to eliminate the “Alpha-isms” — just like the Destroids.


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Marine Book
Unread postPosted: Sun Oct 18, 2015 5:37 pm
  

User avatar
Champion

Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2000 1:01 am
Posts: 2678
Location: Dino Swamp (well...should be "underseas")
There kinda is a Super Logan in the show. Marie's Logan sports a different paint scheme than that of the ASC "brownies". Perhaps she is wielding an "S" model and the brownies are wielding "J" models. At the very least, the Logan should have a commander variant with a C2/IFF data link just like the VF-1s and VF-6s have. (Same thing for the Shadow Fighters...Maia clearly has a different head scheme than the rest of Skull Squadron...and it is still a Shadow Alpha. It deserves a Commanders C2/IFF data link too).

_________________
I want to see from Palladium:
Updated Aug 2015
-Rifts: Dark Woods/Deep South, Space 110 PA, Scandinavia
-Mechanoids: Space (MDC)
-Robotech: Errata for Marines timeline, Masters Deluxe with SC and UEEF gear, Spaceships
-Updated Errata for post-2006 printings of Rifts books
-Searchable, quality PDFs/E-pubs of current Rifts titles


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Marine Book
Unread postPosted: Sun Oct 18, 2015 7:03 pm
  

User avatar
Knight

Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2001 2:01 am
Posts: 3441
Location: 25th Member of the "Cabal of 24"
Comment: Token Right Wing Fascist Totalitarian
"Never hit a man while he's down. Kick them, it's easier" - The Hunt
Kagashi wrote:
There kinda is a Super Logan in the show. Marie's Logan sports a different paint scheme than that of the ASC "brownies". Perhaps she is wielding an "S" model and the brownies are wielding "J" models. At the very least, the Logan should have a commander variant with a C2/IFF data link just like the VF-1s and VF-6s have. (Same thing for the Shadow Fighters...Maia clearly has a different head scheme than the rest of Skull Squadron...and it is still a Shadow Alpha. It deserves a Commanders C2/IFF data link too).

I believe Maia's alpha is a ZX model

So it appears that they can retro or build new units with the Shadow Device on some different design principles.


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Marine Book
Unread postPosted: Sun Oct 18, 2015 7:19 pm
  

User avatar
Rifts® Trivia Master

Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2003 3:37 pm
Posts: 13061
Location: Missouri
dataweaver wrote:
glitterboy2098 wrote:
if we could use it, i'd go with a the old 1st ed "super logan" .. fluff it as being kinda like the Super hornet, in that it was designed to use common parts, but be bigger and offer more capabilities. then you could have both Logans and 'super logans' in use by both the UEEF and ASC (perhaps with two different engine set ups.. PC for the UEEF, SLMH for the ASC)

this would give us an extra VF for both groups, and give the ASC a decent ground attack VF prior to the Ajax.
Personal opinion: the last thing the 2015–2030 era needs is yet another mecha design that incorporates Alpha parts into a non-Alpha design — especially since the question at hand is “what filled the role before the Alpha did?”

If there's a Super-Logan design for this timeframe, it needs a visual redesign to eliminate the “Alpha-isms” — just like the Destroids.



or you know, the "alpha stylings" pre-date the alpha, and it was designed to use common parts and aesthetics from the predecessor units.

the Super Logan's missile launchers do have a bit of a alpha styling.. but the condor also has those hatches and stuff. so rather it becomes the Alpha making use of existing components from the Super Logan and Condor to save design time and simplify production retooling.

though to be honest, the early alpha bit partly comes from the "from the Stars" comic, where an early alpha prototype was flying in 2014.
that said, the prototype looked different. with more Valkyrie like stylings.

so the best solution might be to assume the early Alpha's looked like variations of this:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v228/ ... /vfx62.jpg
with a different weapons load, and that the recognizable blocky flying arsenal's from New Generation didn't come around till a bit before the mass production began.

_________________
Author of Rifts: Deep Frontier (Rifter 70)
Author of Rifts:Scandinavia (current project)
Image
* All fantasy should have a solid base in reality.
* Good sense about trivialities is better than nonsense about things that matter.

-Max Beerbohm
Visit my Website


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Marine Book
Unread postPosted: Sun Oct 18, 2015 8:56 pm
  

User avatar
Knight

Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 6:36 am
Posts: 5004
Location: New Frontier Shipyard, Earth-Moon L5
Comment: "My theories appall you, my heresies outrage you, I never answer letters, and you don't like my tie."
mech798 wrote:
The problme is that if you suddenly have a run away hit with that comic... what can you then do? the fact that VF-1s are dicy for any part of the Franchise, let alone the cartoon part, makes them more or less poison for every other part.

They're not "dicy" if the usage is legally merchandise... Harmony Gold can make as much VF-1-based merchandise as they wish, as long as their license is valid. Video games, comic books, novelizations, these things are all legally merchandise because they're all based upon a cinematic work.



dataweaver wrote:
OK. Bearing in mind that we're talking about what belongs in an RPG supplement, and not other media like comic books, TV series, or movies: [...]
So the Alpha was the exception rather than the rule until 2031, and the Beta didn't hit testing until 2036. So prior to 2031, what was the UEEF's mainstay veritech design?

The problem is that the RPG contains contradictory statements WRT the Alpha's introduction.

One of the very first statements in the Alpha entry in the core book is a statement that the Alpha has been the UEEF's main VF for a couple decades by the time of Shadow Chronicles. That lines up with canon, except for the bit about continuous upgrades. Its subsequent statements paint a completely different picture of the Alpha being in service for only about 12 years.

Being based on the old Sentinels lore instead of canon, the Marines book asserts that the VF-1 was the standard until the Beta's introduction... with the Logan and other fighters playing a more minor role.



dataweaver wrote:
The notion that the UEEF was making widespread use of the Alpha prior to 2031 is not consistent with tSC.

To be mercilessly precise... the notion that the UEEF was making widepsread use of the Alpha prior to 2031 is canon and accurate to Robotech proper. It was, officially, the main VF of the UEEF for 22 years, and likely will continue to be so.

The RPG is in two minds about the Alpha's service lifespan (see above).

_________________
Macross2.net - Home of the Macross Mecha Manual

Zer0 Kay wrote:
Damn you for anticipating my question. I've really got to unfoe you, your information is far more valuable than my sanity when dealing with your blunt callousness. :)


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Marine Book
Unread postPosted: Sun Oct 18, 2015 9:58 pm
  

User avatar
Adventurer

Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2004 9:34 pm
Posts: 652
Seto Kaiba wrote:
dataweaver wrote:
OK. Bearing in mind that we're talking about what belongs in an RPG supplement, and not other media like comic books, TV series, or movies: [...]
So the Alpha was the exception rather than the rule until 2031, and the Beta didn't hit testing until 2036. So prior to 2031, what was the UEEF's mainstay veritech design?

The problem is that the RPG contains contradictory statements WRT the Alpha's introduction.

One of the very first statements in the Alpha entry in the core book is a statement that the Alpha has been the UEEF's main VF for a couple decades by the time of Shadow Chronicles. That lines up with canon, except for the bit about continuous upgrades. Its subsequent statements paint a completely different picture of the Alpha being in service for only about 12 years.
I'll have to double check the precise wording of that initial statement; but note that the dates I quoted have the Alpha in service since 2020ish, but not entering mass production until 2031. That puts it among the UEEF's veritechs for over two decades as of the Shadow Chronicles timeframe, but only in great numbers for approximately a dozen years. That's not as contradictory as you're making it out to be. Whether or not that aligns with “canon” is a secondary concern, especially since the source of canon for the Alpha's longevity is rooted in a series that has been decanonized. Tear up that root, and the Alpha's longevity can no longer be assumed to be canon either.

EDIT: I found the precise wording: “The mighty Alpha has been the premier aerospace superiority mecha of the UEEF for nearly thirty years”. If that were true, it would have started filling that role not long after 2014, which is inconsistent even with the Sentinels-based timeline (which has it start service no sooner than 2019). It's safe to say that this statement is an exaggeration and and outlier, whereas the rest of the Shadow Chronicles RPG book paints a consistent picture.

Seto Kaiba wrote:
Being based on the old Sentinels lore instead of canon, the Marines book asserts that the VF-1 was the standard until the Beta's introduction... with the Logan and other fighters playing a more minor role.
Yeah; well, one of the primary complaints about the Marines Sourcebook is its inconsistency with the rest of the RPG series, specifically due to it going with the Sentinels timeline rather than the Prelude to Shadow Chronicles timeline that the other books use.

Seto Kaiba wrote:
dataweaver wrote:
The notion that the UEEF was making widespread use of the Alpha prior to 2031 is not consistent with tSC.

To be mercilessly precise... the notion that the UEEF was making widepsread use of the Alpha prior to 2031 is canon and accurate to Robotech proper. It was, officially, the main VF of the UEEF for 22 years, and likely will continue to be so.

The RPG is in two minds about the Alpha's service lifespan (see above).
As I pointed out, the RPG isn't quite so split on the Alpha's lifespan as you indicate (Marines Sourcebook notwithstanding); and as I said up front, when discussing an RPG supplement, consistency with the rest of the RPG series takes precedence over being canon and accurate to Robotech proper — which, for what it's worth, isn't as set in stone as one might think: see my earlier comment about the Alpha's longevity being rooted in Sentinels lore.


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Marine Book
Unread postPosted: Sun Oct 18, 2015 11:38 pm
  

User avatar
Adventurer

Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2004 9:34 pm
Posts: 652
glitterboy2098 wrote:
so the best solution might be to assume the early Alpha's looked like variations of this:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v228/ ... /vfx62.jpg
with a different weapons load, and that the recognizable blocky flying arsenal's from New Generation didn't come around till a bit before the mass production began.
My inclination would have been to use the Super-Vector from the IMAI Files as a sort of “missing link” between the Valkyrie and the Alpha, and say that that's what was in service in the UEEF from 2020–2031. Of course, I would also have liked to have seen the IMAI Destroids (Tiger, CougarPanther?, Jackal, and Boxer) instead of the Destroids we got. Marines Sourcebook made liberal use of IMAI designs for Cyclones and Invid; I don't get why they didn't go all the way and give us IMAI-based Destroids and Veritechs as well.


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Marine Book
Unread postPosted: Mon Oct 19, 2015 2:27 am
  

User avatar
Adventurer

Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2004 7:52 am
Posts: 793
Location: Baltimore, Md
A thought hit me about the Beta. Except for in New Generation, the Beta is never really seen as being piloted in any of the other media (comics and Sentinels Movie). What if the Beta did start development under the VF-7 placeholder, but due to the failures of the design, a decision was made to basically strip out everything veritechy about it and keep the shell as a basic booster for the Alpha. Put a basic combat/pilot AI in it, like the ones in the Vandals, and you would have a BF-7 TREAD booster. Then a couple of years later, the UEEF saw the need to have a piloted version, so they restarted the Beta project under the VF-9 placeholder, and just used the shell from the BF-7 that they were already producing. Considering that the UEEF has a habit of using older designs for new purposes (Angel Colony ships into Neutron-S missiles, various Alpha parts on Conbat and other mecha, Cyclone parts on other mecha, etc), it would make sense for them to redo the body of the BF-7 TREAD into the VF-9 Beta. Most pilots would already be familiar with how the docked mecha would perform, and the engineers wouldn't have to start completely from scratch.

_________________
Moderator 3 of 6, Rec.Games.Mecha Newsgroup for Robot Games Discussion.
10th Lyran Guards, The Revenants.
Image


          Top  
 
 
Post new topic Reply to topic



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users


Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Jump to:  

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group