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

 


Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
Unread postPosted: Fri May 04, 2018 10:08 am
  

User avatar
Knight

Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2006 10:50 am
Posts: 6134
Location: WI
(from another topic that got me thinking on the issue, here is my take on the issue, the listed options should be by no means considered a complete list. I also came up with another option, but I'm not sure if/when I'll post it)

The ASC's non-transformable battloids where developed with modular interchangeable arm limbs (see 2E New Generation SB on the IMU "guidelines"). Initially this was for maintenance purposes so the mecha would not need to be shipped back (at great expense) to a repair depot. Such work could be handled at regular bases, it also meant that the nt-battloids could be disassembled for easier transport and reassembled on site. The ASC was hoping to have their own family of Destroid designs like the UEEF was developing and the UEDF:RDF had for heavy combat, however politically the ASC found it difficult to secure funding for all new designs in the late 2010s and throughout the 2020s, especially for non-Veritech mecha. This meant that the ASC would have to develop cost efficient Destroid designs, ones that where based on existing designs.

The ASC considered some type of upgrades to the old UEDF:RDF platforms, but this was viewed as at best a stop gap measure (and with production lines closed unable to replace losses). Not to mention the designs where much bigger, and the ASC was looking to down size mecha. This desire for smaller mecha would influence the ASC to decline to become a (late) partner on the UEEF destroid designs, though that wasn't the only reason.

This lead to the ASC adopting a modified and simplified version of the R-04 Destroid's concept of a "weapon's jacket" for the Tomahawk that would compete with the Spartan Destroid, but was not selected. Where the R-04 involved a massive upper body change out (shoulders pods, arms, outboard missile pods, and a backpack), the ASC went with a simpler approach mating the modular arm technology with a highly configurable "weapon pod". Since getting funding for "new weapon systems" might prove difficult, the ASC went with adapting existing designs (UEDF:RDF or ASC) or becoming a partner on development of existing systems (UEEF)

The following standardized Weapon Systems where adapted for the Arm Weapon Pod (note these replace the actual arms of the units):
1. RDF's GU-11. The GU-11 is modified with a much larger magazine capacity (increase payload by x4)
2. ASC's EU-11. Like the GU-11 the EU-11 was adapted into an "internal" configuration only. The unit also sports a dedicated power pack (estimate x10 the payload before power runs out). Note: for 1E based games I suggest using the Logan's nose gun instead.
3. UEEF AAC-11 Flack Cannon Equivalent (see Silverback entry, while a 2040 system I think it is likely older serving on other vehicles). Double payload. It was slated to replace the GU-11 as the defacto short-range projectile weapon by the early 2030s after its introduction late in 2027, though was available in testing for a few years prior.
4. M-1300 60mm Anti-Aircraft lasers Equivalent (see UEEF Defender Destroid). Contains its own power pack (estimate sustained fire for 10minutes before fuel runs out for a Level 1 pilot with MCE).
5. M-996 Auto Cannons (see UEDF Defender Destroid) variant. The weapon is single barrel (1/2 damage, 1/2 burst size) with 2/3 the range (barrel shortened to fit) and contains 1/3 the payload (internally).
6. LMMDS-12 (see Silverback) style Missile Launcher with x4 the payload. Contains one set of reloads (1/2 payload is ready to fire). Intended for Phalanx and Defender Roles
7. MMMDS-6 (see Silverback) style Missile launcher with x2 the payload. no reloads. Intended for Phalanx and Defender Roles
8. MIW-20 Ion Cannons (see VHT) or LPW-20 Plasma Cannon (see Logan). The unit sports a dedicated power pack (estimate 10minutes of sustained fire for a Level 1 pilot with MCE)
9. MCR068A1 105mm Cannon (see VHT-1). A self contained packaged version of the VHT-1's weapon. Due to the Battloid's lighter mass, some recoil suppression is included.
10. Heavy Particle Cannon. Initially a modified Tomahawk design (to reduce size, reduce range by 25%), and then a variant of the VHT-1's particle cannon (it received it first). Both feature an independent power pack (estimate 5 minutes of sustained use with MCE at level 1)
11. M-1255 120mm Laser Cannon Equivalent (see UEEF Spartan Destroid)

Non-Combat Arm modules where also developed to enhance Cyclops and Satyr Battloids in their primary missions, and to explore other roles for all the Battloids (if even just at the prototype/evaluation stage, these might still be around in Invid Occupied Earth sitting in a warehouse).

Another Destroid-level addition for the ASC non-transformable battloids was the recycling of the four hardpoint connectors used by AJP-01 Battloid Jump Packs (see 2E Masters Saga SB for details) for other roles. One connector was on each lower leg, and another pair on the back (one upper and one lower).

Leg units are fairly unimpressive: 4 shot SRM (akin to the Alpha's MM-60) or 8 shot Mini Missile (4 ready, 4 reload) Each. Ammo bins and power packs where considered, but the ammo bin belts where found to be problematic, as where external power pack hookups (internal transfer would require some modification of the battloids power distribution system). Some non-combat units where developed for the Cyclops and Satyr Battloid missions.

Back Units come with more options:
1. Lower Back is configured into two ammo bins to provide belt fed extensions for the GU-11, AAC-11, M-996 cannons (each bin holds x2 what the arm module holds for each arm). A projectile gunpod variant exists, though can only fed one gunpod and uses the area from both arm bins to feed a single weapon)
2. Lower Back power pack is configured to provide extra energy for the battloid's built in energy weapons or energy based gunpods (with a hookup cable) or Energy Based Arm Weapon Pods
3. Upper Back Mini Missile Launcher. As the Silverback unit. A lower back module attachment provides a reloads.
3. Upper Back Short Range Missile Launcher. As Silverback LMMDS-12. A lower back module attachment provides a reload.
4. Upper Back a top mounted heavy weapon module is installed (akin to the Silverback in Battloid Mode or Regult Artillery Pods). Lower Back Ammunition/Power Pack options are compatible. These are almost always missile (SRM or MRM) or heavy beam weaponry (as heavy projectile weapons deliver to much recoil).


          Top  
 
Unread postPosted: Fri May 04, 2018 8:24 pm
  

User avatar
Priest

Joined: Tue Sep 02, 2003 8:19 pm
Posts: 43063
Location: Somewhere between Heaven, Hell, and New England
Given that to an ASC battloid, a GU-11 gunpod is bigger than a freakin' bazooka....I say there's still scale problems unless you devise a new weapon with more compact workings. And improperly sited, the recoil on full auto's going to be a bastard.

_________________
-------------
"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  
 
Unread postPosted: Fri May 04, 2018 9:23 pm
  

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.
Personally I like the idea that the ASC preferred to use conventional platforms for artillery and air defense because, realistically, they would do it better.

Lightly armed and armoured, but mobile mecha strike me as the niche that realistic mecha would fit into. The Battles and Power Armour of the ASC seem to fit that mold pretty well.

With that out of the way, this is Robotech and chicks dig giant robots with way too many guns, so go for it.

I don't think there would be a lot of conventional cannons due to weight, recoil and ammunition issues. With the exception of the VHT-1, the ASC seem to have abandoned kinetic weapons on full sized mecha (and the VHT-1 was upgrading to an all energy configuration). So I would stick to energy weapons myself. Perhaps equivalent to the (40mm?) Air defense lasers on many human space craft or the 60mm lasers of the UEEF version of the Defender if you want an air defense platform. Something like a toned down version of the VHT-1's big energy cannon for a direct fire anti-armour platform.

Missiles are still fine and large launch systems for medium range missiles could make sense. Also a combination of short range missiles and the rotary plasma cannon form the VHTs could be an interesting close in air defense system.

For the back, missile packs or thruster packs make a lot of sense. A mast mounted sensor system could be useful (especially for the air defense and recon variants). A big over the shoulder energy cannon (UEEF Tomahawk or the big ion cannon from the VHT-1 mounted like a Glitter-boy's Boom Gun) could also work here.

Perhaps a FAST pack or Armour system comparable to the Valkyrie could also work, turning a regular battloid into something akin to the Assault Battloid from the first edition.

_________________
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  
 
Unread postPosted: Fri May 04, 2018 9:34 pm
  

User avatar
Palladin

Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2009 8:33 pm
Posts: 10507
Location: Peterborough, Ontario
Comment: Yeah yeah yeah just give me my damn XP already :)
taalismn wrote:
Given that to an ASC battloid, a GU-11 gunpod is bigger than a freakin' bazooka....I say there's still scale problems unless you devise a new weapon with more compact workings. And improperly sited, the recoil on full auto's going to be a bastard.


Gu-11S of the hargun maybe?

_________________
I am very opinionated. Yes I rub people the wrong way but at the end of the day I just enjoy good hard discussion and will gladly walk away agreeing to not agree :D

Email - jlaflamme7521@hotmail.com, Facebook - Jaymz LaFlamme, Robotech.com - Icerzone

\m/


          Top  
 
Unread postPosted: Fri May 04, 2018 11:14 pm
  

User avatar
Knight

Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 6:36 am
Posts: 5005
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:
The ASC's non-transformable battloids where developed with modular interchangeable arm limbs (see 2E New Generation SB on the IMU "guidelines"). [...] The ASC was hoping to have their own family of Destroid designs like the UEEF was developing and the UEDF:RDF had for heavy combat, however politically the ASC found it difficult to secure funding for all new designs in the late 2010s and throughout the 2020s, especially for non-Veritech mecha. This meant that the ASC would have to develop cost efficient Destroid designs, ones that where based on existing designs.

After I started digging into the original Super Dimension Cavalry Southern Cross, I began to suspect that a more extreme version of this was in play for all of the Southern Cross Army's non-transforming robots.

In both versions, the Southern Cross Army was a small military organization defending a lightly populated planet. It had a large number of small, specialist units intended to operate in certain types of terrain. Each of those units had its own robot design. It wouldn't make sense for a small, relatively resource-poor military to design and build a new model of mecha for each of a half-dozen specialist units. What I think is going on there is that there's one common frame shared by all of them, and the different designs are the result of different mission-specific hardware mounted onto that common frame. So if you wanted a unit that was suitable for underwater operation, you'd install modular parts for underwater mobility and breathing mixture storage. If you wanted one for mountaineering, you install feet with a bigger traction surface. Etc. That way it keeps the cost of production down by maximizing commonality in parts and, in a pinch, any model can be adapted to any environment.

As much as I like the idea of the different types of weapon arms and will cheerfully point to OSM support for the idea, I'm inclined to say it might be unnecessary for these units. One of the versatile points of designing them to use hand-held weapons is that can conceivably wield a variety of different weapons without needing modification. I'd expect to see, say, something like the kind of loadout on the RX-78[G] Gundam Ground Type from Mobile Suit Gundam: 08th MS Team... a long-range bombardment weapon, a short/medium-range weapon, and a close combat weapon all carried at once.



ShadowLogan wrote:
The following standardized Weapon Systems where adapted for the Arm Weapon Pod (note these replace the actual arms of the units):
1. RDF's GU-11. The GU-11 is modified with a much larger magazine capacity (increase payload by x4)

The MBR-04-Mk.IVc Tomahawk route is one I've always liked, but it might be a poor fit for the smaller mecha of the Southern Cross/Masters Saga story. Those robots are 6-7m tall, IIRC, and the GU-11 is 5.7m long in its folded configuration. Plus, y'know, it weighs ~1,500kg fully loaded with 200 rounds. You'd end up with the guns being as large as the mecha itself, and weighing almost half as much. (not counting the increased payload).

For the larger weapons, I'd lean more towards a handheld weapons system that could be lugged around like it's a minigun... like, say, have the barrels of the GU-11 handheld but displace the ammo into a drum or pannier on the mecha's back so the size can be reduced a bit.

_________________
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  
 
Unread postPosted: Sat May 05, 2018 9:47 am
  

User avatar
Knight

Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2006 10:50 am
Posts: 6134
Location: WI
taalismn wrote:
Given that to an ASC battloid, a GU-11 gunpod is bigger than a freakin' bazooka....I say there's still scale problems unless you devise a new weapon with more compact workings. And improperly sited, the recoil on full auto's going to be a bastard.

And @jaymz
And @Seto
I did consider size, and if mounted similar to the Defender's arm guns there really isn't a scale problem. In Battloid Mode the VF-1 is ~42ft tall, with the GU-11 being less than 1/2 that height in length (it can be mounted on the arm). The VHT-1 is approx. the same size as a nt-battloid, and using the RT.com size comparison chart you could do it as I've suggested (arms might be a bit thick, approaching Spartas arm+shield thickness).

Recoil is an issue, but the ASC nt-Battloids actually are more massive than the VF-1 (14-19tons dry vs 15 tons in an unspecified state). Weather they could handle the recoil of 2 such weapons I'll grant you might be expecting a bit much out of all of them, but they could install some type of recoil suppression system.

Jeffar wrote:
Personally I like the idea that the ASC preferred to use conventional platforms for artillery and air defense because, realistically, they would do it better.

Personally I agree, the Destroids are an overly complicated platform for the roles they perform. This was more of a thought experiment on what ASC destroids might look like using the UEDF:RDF baseline given the UEEF took the same approach.

Jeffar wrote:
I don't think there would be a lot of conventional cannons due to weight, recoil and ammunition issues. With the exception of the VHT-1, the ASC seem to have abandoned kinetic weapons on full sized mecha (and the VHT-1 was upgrading to an all energy configuration). So I would stick to energy weapons myself. Perhaps equivalent to the (40mm?) Air defense lasers on many human space craft or the 60mm lasers of the UEEF version of the Defender if you want an air defense platform. Something like a toned down version of the VHT-1's big energy cannon for a direct fire anti-armour platform.

While I can agree to some extent that projectile weapons don't match the "feel" of the ASC in 2029-30, projectile weapons could have been more favored earlier in the organization's history (like in the 2010s) as I'm not sure how old the various designs are (we know the Unicorn PA is old, same with the VHTs).

I would also point out that if you want to put out a large volume of fire (atleast by RPG terms) energy weapons have a long way to go as their burst size typically tops out at 10 "bolts", with 5 "bolts" or less being more common. In comparison most projectile weapon bursts start at 10 rounds and go up from there (not that smaller bursts don't exist). This suggests to me (at least in 2E RT RPG terms) that energy weapons have some way to go before they can completely replace projectile weapons for some mission profiles where you need to put a lot of firepower up in a short amount of time.

Seto wrote:
What I think is going on there is that there's one common frame shared by all of them, and the different designs are the result of different mission-specific hardware mounted onto that common frame. [/qoute]
I'm not sure there is a common frame, but I do agree they could share various components to keep costs down. Only a few of the ASC Battloids and PA suits appear (IMHO) to be related though.

Seto wrote:
As much as I like the idea of the different types of weapon arms and will cheerfully point to OSM support for the idea, I'm inclined to say it might be unnecessary for these units. One of the versatile points of designing them to use hand-held weapons is that can conceivably wield a variety of different weapons without needing modification. I'd expect to see, say, something like the kind of loadout on the RX-78[G] Gundam Ground Type from Mobile Suit Gundam: 08th MS Team... a long-range bombardment weapon, a short/medium-range weapon, and a close combat weapon all carried at once.

Its a trade off really. While there are certainly advantages to the hand-held gunpods, I suspect they also have their downsides compared to the "weapon arms" like:
-maintenance, how much added wear do gunpod firings have on the mecha's limbs
--mechanically the weapon arms are much more simpler, where the use of the gunpod is more complex
-the amount of fire power one can deploy, typically we only see one gunpod deployed if you can replace both arms
-inorder to maintain the best handling of the weapon payload might suffer in comparison to a mounted system

I'm sure there are others (I want to say bore size might be a factor with larger sizes being more usable by the arm system than the gunpod, even recoil might be better managed by the arm system instead of a gunpod).


          Top  
 
Unread postPosted: Sat May 05, 2018 8:51 pm
  

User avatar
Priest

Joined: Tue Sep 02, 2003 8:19 pm
Posts: 43063
Location: Somewhere between Heaven, Hell, and New England
ShadowLogan wrote:
[
I did consider size, and if mounted similar to the Defender's arm guns there really isn't a scale problem. In Battloid Mode the VF-1 is ~42ft tall, with the GU-11 being less than 1/2 that height in length (it can be mounted on the arm). The VHT-1 is approx. the same size as a nt-battloid, and using the RT.com size comparison chart you could do it as I've suggested (arms might be a bit thick, approaching Spartas arm+shield thickness).

Recoil is an issue, but the ASC nt-Battloids actually are more massive than the VF-1 (14-19tons dry vs 15 tons in an unspecified state). Weather they could handle the recoil of 2 such weapons I'll grant you might be expecting a bit much out of all of them, but they could install some type of recoil suppression system..


Fair enough. And the projectile tech's low enough that you can probably set up factories around the globe able to mass-produce and stockpile the ammo all over the place. Great if you're sending your mecha forces into the field, away from areas where spare parts for energy weapon systems are in short supply, and balances the 'lmitless ammo supply' advantage of powerplant-powered DEWs.

_________________
-------------
"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  
 
Unread postPosted: Sat May 05, 2018 8:58 pm
  

User avatar
Palladin

Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2009 8:33 pm
Posts: 10507
Location: Peterborough, Ontario
Comment: Yeah yeah yeah just give me my damn XP already :)
Point of contention...I did not say it was not doable...I just mentioned using the GU-11S of the hargun instead Taal believeed size was an issue.

_________________
I am very opinionated. Yes I rub people the wrong way but at the end of the day I just enjoy good hard discussion and will gladly walk away agreeing to not agree :D

Email - jlaflamme7521@hotmail.com, Facebook - Jaymz LaFlamme, Robotech.com - Icerzone

\m/


          Top  
 
Unread postPosted: Sat May 05, 2018 10:08 pm
  

User avatar
Knight

Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 6:36 am
Posts: 5005
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:
And @jaymz
And @Seto
I did consider size, and if mounted similar to the Defender's arm guns there really isn't a scale problem. In Battloid Mode the VF-1 is ~42ft tall, with the GU-11 being less than 1/2 that height in length (it can be mounted on the arm). The VHT-1 is approx. the same size as a nt-battloid, and using the RT.com size comparison chart you could do it as I've suggested (arms might be a bit thick, approaching Spartas arm+shield thickness).

It'd be pretty darn big, yeah... though even if they were mounted at the shoulder you'd have the gunbarrels scraping along the ground on anything less than level terrain. The GU-11A is a big gunpod, at a whopping 5.7m long in its most compact form.



ShadowLogan wrote:
Recoil is an issue, but the ASC nt-Battloids actually are more massive than the VF-1 (14-19tons dry vs 15 tons in an unspecified state). Weather they could handle the recoil of 2 such weapons I'll grant you might be expecting a bit much out of all of them, but they could install some type of recoil suppression system.

They could always go in for the rocket-propelled rounds the OSM GU-11D used for recoil mitigation. As long as you don't get up close, they offer reduced recoil for little to no loss of power.



ShadowLogan wrote:
Personally I agree, the Destroids are an overly complicated platform for the roles they perform. This was more of a thought experiment on what ASC destroids might look like using the UEDF:RDF baseline given the UEEF took the same approach.

Remember, there was a reason for making them the way they did... they were designed in expectation of fighting an alien invader who was a good 9-10m tall. The sort of guy who could simply kick or step on a tank.



ShadowLogan wrote:
I would also point out that if you want to put out a large volume of fire (atleast by RPG terms) energy weapons have a long way to go as their burst size typically tops out at 10 "bolts", with 5 "bolts" or less being more common. In comparison most projectile weapon bursts start at 10 rounds and go up from there (not that smaller bursts don't exist). This suggests to me (at least in 2E RT RPG terms) that energy weapons have some way to go before they can completely replace projectile weapons for some mission profiles where you need to put a lot of firepower up in a short amount of time.

When it comes to weapons that depend on a large volume of fire, that volume of fire is not so much because they need to put enormous amounts of firepower on the target as it is to ensure that they get A shot on a highly mobile target. Laser gunpods kind of eliminate that problem and are conveniently recoil-free.



ShadowLogan wrote:
Its a trade off really. While there are certainly advantages to the hand-held gunpods, I suspect they also have their downsides compared to the "weapon arms" like:
-maintenance, how much added wear do gunpod firings have on the mecha's limbs
--mechanically the weapon arms are much more simpler, where the use of the gunpod is more complex
-the amount of fire power one can deploy, typically we only see one gunpod deployed if you can replace both arms
-inorder to maintain the best handling of the weapon payload might suffer in comparison to a mounted system

Weapon arms might be mechanically simpler, but it comes at a cost to versatility.

Having a weapon like the GU-11A as an arm might be simpler in the short-term, but it complicates the reloading process since the mecha can't simply pick up a new weapon or install a new magazine... instead, you have to either dismount the entire arm and replace it, or have specialist field equipment to reload the gunpod while the mecha is standing, since presumably laying down is not an option.

WRT weight of fire, that depends chiefly on weapons availability. There's little immediate difference between carrying two gunpods and having two gunpods built-in, since at the end of the day you need two gunpods handy. When it comes to the largely recoilless energy weapons of the later sagas, there's literally nothing stopping them except gunpod availability.

Payload just means you have to get a bit creative. If you're giving a built-in version of a standard portable gunpod more ammo, that ammo has to be stored somewhere... and if you can do it with the built-in gun you can do it just as easily with the handheld one. For the GU-11A, for instance, instead of the helical magazine in the front of the gun put a belt feed to a drum mounted on the hip or the back, for instance.

_________________
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  
 
Unread postPosted: Sun May 06, 2018 1:47 pm
  

User avatar
Knight

Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2006 10:50 am
Posts: 6134
Location: WI
jaymz wrote:
Point of contention...I did not say it was not doable...I just mentioned using the GU-11S of the hargun instead Taal believeed size was an issue.

I'm just pointing out that the GU-11S from the Hargun may not be necessary since the VF-1's GU-11 can fit. I can agree that it might be a better fit for some of the nt-battloids than others (3/4ths are 20+ ft tall). If you have issues with the height, any one can feel free to not use the baseline GU-11 and substitute another system (GU-11S or one of the other projectile weapons in TMS SB) or even just rule out options on the list for their games.

Seto wrote:
It'd be pretty darn big, yeah... though even if they were mounted at the shoulder you'd have the gunbarrels scraping along the ground on anything less than level terrain. The GU-11A is a big gunpod, at a whopping 5.7m long in its most compact form.

I can agree that it will be close to the ground, but that really isn't any different than the M-996 on the Defender. Given the GU-11 is likely to be modified to fire in this fashion, I can certainly see them addressing issues that might arise (options for recoil management exist), so they might employ some redesign of the basic weapon to accommodate travel on uneven terrain or reloading (might also have to account for the casing ejection port).

Seto wrote:
Having a weapon like the GU-11A as an arm might be simpler in the short-term, but it complicates the reloading process since the mecha can't simply pick up a new weapon or install a new magazine... instead, you have to either dismount the entire arm and replace it, or have specialist field equipment to reload the gunpod while the mecha is standing, since presumably laying down is not an option.

Precedent for how the UEDF:ASC might implement such a program exists in both the UEDF:RDF and UEEF Destroids. Now an ammunition based system is going to run into the reload issue I can agree, but one that would not be new given the ASC could design such systems with a "lessons learned" approach from the UEDF: RDF since the reload issue would have to be addressed by not only the GU-11, but also the various missile systems (for example).

Nt-Battloids though don't need to stand, they could in theory kneel and bend down further to reduce the height. Pilot likely won't be able to get out, but it would be one way to reduce the height needed for the support platform. If this is done for reloading, they could also put the reload ports in easier to access location. Now you are correct if they could swap out the weapons like a hand-held they could "reload" faster from certain POV, but depending on specifics on how the ASC actually designed the weapon arms they might be able to accomplish the same feat (make them jettison-able in part, with some type of "pickup" system like Khyron's OP uses in the PC raid in Ep35).

Seto wrote:
There's little immediate difference between carrying two gunpods and having two gunpods built-in, since at the end of the day you need two gunpods handy. When it comes to the largely recoilless energy weapons of the later sagas, there's literally nothing stopping them except gunpod availability.

There is likely some difference in terms of operation of two hand-held gunpods vs two built-in. Most of RT's hand-held Gunpods are 'rifle/carbine" like in design, which means they are most effective when using two hands (not saying they can't do 1 handed). I would also point out that AFAIK no Battloid mode/class mecha in RT is known to actually wield two hand-held gunpods in their hands*, but we have numerous examples of dual arm-replacement/arm-mounted weapon systems (23** IINM). That at least suggests it is more practical/effective to dual wield the weapons either as arm-replacements or arm-mounted systems.

*the closest we get to this is the VFA-6 Alpha in NG saga when it gets depicted carrying two gunpods in Fighter Mode, but not guardian or battloid. Fanart/lineart might depict such feats, and I do not dispute that it could not be done

**UEDF Monster, UEDF Phalanx, UEDF Defender, UEDF Tomahawk, Zentreadi Female Power Armor and Officer's Pod, Invid Solider (should the Regent's variants count separately or as one given they are different sizes?), Invid Battloid, that Invid VT (also the basis for the Regent's Prelude suit), GR-97s on Cyclone and Silverback, Beta, Condor and Alpha missile systems, UEEF Monster, UEEF Phalanx, UEEF Defender, UEEF Zent Officer's Pod, the VHT-1 and VHT-2, both of the VF-1 add-ons provide forearm missile launchers, the YF-4 in RTT (dual forearm guns). This ignores VR-041 CADS (or similar dual bladed weapons), or mixed pairing, the option to mount two forearm gunpods on the AGAC (infopedia makes it standard, 2E RPG optional) or EP40s on the Cyclone/Silverback hub-station that we know are possible, and the various 2E RPG IMUs (and some 1E designs).


          Top  
 
Unread postPosted: Sat May 12, 2018 11:30 am
  

User avatar
Knight

Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2006 10:50 am
Posts: 6134
Location: WI
(this is the other option I came up with, while not technically a Destroid given its mode limitations it could be viewed as one operationally even though it might be properly considered a Veritech, this approach might also work for "Half-Moon" episodes 3 barrel mecha, and why 15th's "backup" deployed with IIRC VHTs per dialogue but none are actually seen)

ASC Veritech Hover Tank Destroid
While officially classified as a Veritech, the bi-modal VHT-D (official it would be the VHT-#, for easier integration I leave the # assignment blank) is generally regarded as being a glorified Destroid by many (in universe) given that while it transforms, the transformation is pretty limited.

Destroids, and to an extent their lighter battloid cousins, had transportability issues compared to the VHT and more conventional platforms. The giant robots would have to be specially rigged for transport (which could mean disassembly), which made them poor rapid responders unless using specialized platforms. Their movement speed is also limited compared to the VHT (in transport mode the VHT can do 100mph, running the best battloids and destroids don't reach this). However the VHT-1 and VHT-2 make compromise in terms of firepower for versatility. And so the VHT-D program was initiated, looking for a way to bring the best attributes of the Destroids (firepower) with the speed and mobility of a VHT. The end result was a single basic frame with modular weapon configurations.

The VHT-D was derived from the same test bed the VHT-1 and VHT-2 came from. While subject to a host of changes engineers where able to retain the VHT-1's speed and basic size while improving pilot protection (a running "complaint" form VHT pilots) and increasing firepower at the cost of the transformability options.

The first change to the VHT-D was the replacement of the arms with simpler weapon bays, bays that where modified from the arm shields. The armshield bays are also retained. This also prompted the removal of arm associate hardware in the central body of the tank (there are no shoulder rotation mechanisms) since Battloid mode wasn't an available mode option. This space was reclaimed mainly for a secondary power plant to help power the additional weapons (without it the VHT-D consumes fuel much faster than normal, along with requiring more frequent maintenance of the fusion reactor). IMU crafters during the Invid occupation would occasionally duplicate the arm/shield config in IMUs using VHTs that could no longer transform to battloid mode (and in some cases stuck in battloid mode)w.

In addition to the standard VHT-1 Arm Shield Weapon in the RPG any Arm-Shield class bay on the VHT-D can mount:
-LPW-20 Plasma Cannon (Logan), generally preferred over the MIW-20 for its increased range
-UEEF AAC-11 Flack Cannon (Silverback), or equivalent to said system
-Missile launcher: x4 60mm Mini-Missiles OR x1 120mm SRM, plus one reload for either Mini-Missile or Short Range Missile
-UEEF HLC-90 Laser Cannon (Bioroid Interceptor), or equivalent to said system
-UEDF auto cannons from TMS SB (the GU-11 would be to big, but some of the smaller caliber cannons could work)
-UEEF M-1255 120mm Laser Cannon (UEEF Spartan Destroid), or equivalent to said system

The central body area of the mecha received the most change. No longer needing to make room for battloid mode components, sufficient forward (in transport mode) internal space was freed up (after some re-organization of component locations) to move the pilot station into this area, proving an enclosed environment for the pilot (top mounted entry hatch). The downside though was the pilot was more reliant on sensors for all modes for situational awareness. Reception of this was mixed from experienced VHT pilots, less so though from those who had cross training in non-transformable battloids or who took more naturally to the VHT's battloid mode. The EU-11 housing and recharging station was removed resulting in the VHT-D being unarmed in transport mode, this was later addressed with an upgrade which installed a pair of beam cannons (equal to a Salamander's head cannons) in a small sensor turret with limited traversability (180deg forward arc, 100deg up/down officially). The turret is available in Tank/Gladiator mode for rear fire support (though almost never used).

The former pilot area was converted into a modular mission bay:
-Ammo Extension Bins for all four side bays (this increases the payload of each projectile weapon, ammo cannon be transferred, not compatible for missile systems)
-Center Gun Mount. Essentially an extra weapons bay equal to the arm shield is installed, contains its own ammo bin (for projectile weapons).
-"Light" Missile Launcher (12 Short Range Missiles, plus one reload)
-Air Defense Radar
-Heavy Weapon Turret Mount


          Top  
 
Unread postPosted: Sat May 12, 2018 3:13 pm
  

User avatar
Knight

Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2007 4:09 am
Posts: 4591
Interesting stuff!

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


          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