Noyhauser

I just watched part 5 last night and I have to say this whole series really disappointed me.  In fact I think it sucked balls.  I hate the whole magic hooey-pooey crap.  Macross, to me, was always about the tech and the mech.  Flying rocks? Bird Humans? Come on.   This was like a totally different show with valks and Fokker thrown in to make a Macross connection.  I never liked Shin nor gave a poo what happened to him or Sara.  Character development was very poor.

Macross Plus had the right vein for a Macross sequel.  If Kawamori wanted to do magic, he should have done Escaflowne Zero.

Well, that's my opinion, commence the bombardment!

Honestly thats your interpretation of what Macross is, sorry to say you aren't Kawamori. I would say that the reason why macross plus is so different is that it wasn't ever intended to be a macross story at all, it was supposed to be of advanced air cavalry chronicles (or whatever he wanted to call it) to be made made after DYRL. The series would have nothing to do with macross. This is a direct quote of Kawamori found here:

http://www.macrossworld.com/macross/transl...cedvalkyrie.htm

Having directed last year's Macross movie, I'd pretty much done all that I'd wanted to do with Macross. So Advanced Valkyrie isn't a sequel to Macross. Macross is a conglomeration of three aspects: the use of music, the use of characters, and mechanics. I want to try working separately from the Macross concept by focusing on each of these points individually. This time, the project is to dig into the mechanical aspect, and in particular the Valkyries. It focuses on aircraft, which I love more than anything else.

Thats exactly what SDF macross was, a synthesis of music characters ect, NOT just the valkyries. He later decided to use the Macross universe to tell the Advance Valkyrie story, however macross plus does not fit the pattern of the rest of the stories. Remove it, and you see a definate pattern between SDF, Macross 7, and Macross zero, going back to my original post months ago about japanese pacifism and the need for alternatives to war.

I'm sorry that you don't get that, you might have a view on what Macross is about, but its wrong, and likely does not follow Kawamori's view. If you don't like it, tough, stop watching and groaning about it. This forum is littered with the detritus of countless Macross 7 threads that have explained it again and again. And still people persist in saying, Oh well its nothing like SDF macross. Hello, maybe thats because what you think SDF macross is, isnt what it was intended to be by Kawamori. I can think of countless famous pieces of literature that have been misintrepreted by scholars to mean one thing, when the author really meant something else, that get illuminated by later pieces of work. Macross Zero only cemented the themes that Kawamori wanted to present. I think it is quite clear what Kawamori is getting at now after these three series have been put out there.

edited for clarity and typos

Honestly the flying rock thing and AFOS argument is pissing me off. if you can believe that human technology can make this float

then you can sure as hell believe that the protoculture (A race far far far more advance than humans) can make a few rocks float around in a jungle. its just that simple.

ahh that looks much better, thanks ewilian! I was thinking about that thread actually.

The compendium does list a take off weight for the VF-1, and I think its a ground take off weight for a fully loaded atmospheric role.

It just goes to show how much #@@ the VF-1 could have wrought if it was deployed in the conflict. Who needs boosters when you already have 3:1 power to weight ratios?

I've got the same translation, and it definately says that the UN took the information from Anti-UN.

Nora: "its just the transformation system they stole from us..."

DD "From their "united" perspective, they didn't steal it from us, all states, regardless..."

To me it sounds like its correct as well, but its too complex a sentence for me to be sure. I'll go ask a japanese friend if she agrees with it as well.

I was referring to DD's and Nora's comment in episode 2 where she said that the UN spacy stole it from them, then DD says, from their united perspective, its not stealing. Maybe the fansubs got it wrong (which isn't the first time) but from listening to it, it seems to me that they are correct.

Moreover, DD could have stolen the VF-1's prototype data, while the UN spacy stole the transformation data before it.

To get away from LV's ideas, i'd like to posit a more realistic vision for a humanoid type military combat vehicle.

There is a game made by Dream Pod 9, called heavy Gear, which took a lot of influence from Armored trooper Votoms (not even close to what Fasa did with macross though). They presented a far more realistic vision of how bipedaled walker techology might be applied to warfare. It was a bit sci-fi ish, although we had ALOT of Mil, and Ex mil types who really kept the idea real. Using the statistics provided by DP9 for their capabilities we developed what I would consider realistic combat doctrine for these vehicles. Humanoid form was more for modularity in weapons, and adaptability for combat situations, allowing Gears to be jack of all trades sort of units. On flat ground they were demolished by tanks, and in streets, infantry had advantages over them. They were most useful on broken up terrain, where tanks were unsuitable (forests, cities, badlands ect). They viewed to be more mobile as well. However they were cheap enough to be massed produced on a scale tanks couldn't. They used gas engines (actually a new type called V-engines which is an actual design), had far less armor than tanks, used rollers under their legs to gain more efficiency for long distances, and were pretty down to earth designs. Their armor was weaker because the humanoid shape creates shot traps for incoming rounds, and prevents the application of a uniform shape for armor (like tanks do, look at the soviet T series)

Heavy gear's designs were realistic given the technological advancements they assumed would occur (the ability to cheaply build these vehicles would be the most contentious). And without those assumptions, it would be difficult to imagine why you would want to design such a complex piece of machinery. I would say that for the most part, the Idea of a humaniod combat vehicle resides on the fiction side of science fiction

However DP9 started to get away from this, and what I would call anime munchkinism set in. It also neglected the line by some poor decisions. I've kinda parted ways from Heavy gear, its nolonger the game I loved for so long.

My apologies, I should have made that distinction. I was talking about the ghost booster modification, because you are completely right, the actual FPs were more like the VF-19's designed to create more loadout options for the fighter in an atmosphere.

Although I'd still say the VF-0 was underpowered, definately compared to the VF-1. If I'm calculating this correctly, the VF-0 doesn't even have a 1:1 thrust ratio... its engine thrust with afterburners is around 15,000Kg (I've calculated it from the Kn rating they give on the compendium, Im not a math major so take that with a grain of salt), and it weighs around 16,000kg empty... in reality, it shouldn't be even able to hover in Gerwalk or Battroid with those sort of statistics (so that probably means I've made an error). The VF-1 has a take off weight of 18,000 Kg, and an overthrust capability of 23,000kg.

Still I think the VF-0 was seen to be an evolutionary step, so that pilots could get some experience in variable combat and to provide some combat data on the design.

Also it could have been a stop gap design to combat a coming Anti-UN threat. They got the designs for the transformation sequence from the Anti-un so they knew something was coming. If the UN-Spacy forsaw that the complexity of the Thermonuclear engine would not be solved for quite some time, they likely opted to produce a second fighter from the original design (much like the Superhornet from the legacy) to fill all these roles.

well I can see perfectly valid technical reasons.

Most Fast Packs are designed for space use, where the design requirements for vehicles are quite different than for atmospheric vehicles. They Allowed fighters to carry more weapons, additional reaction mass (something that Valks were not designed to carry very much of) ect. Remember the VF-1s were first and foremost designed as atmospheric fighters (why build wings at all if you don't plan to fly in the atmosphere). Fast packs just make them more effective space fighters.

As for the VF-19's atmospheric fastpacks, these are designed to allow the fighters to carry more weaponry, without having to deal with the problem of decrease in perfomance. Instead of having wings loaded with massive ammounts of missiles, that just sit there until launch, these fast packs counteract some of the drag by providing more thrust. this is likely at the expense of manuverability, which is a trade off that a pilot must chose between.

The VF-0's fast packs probably existed for a differentreason. Since it was a prototype of a fighter that was supposed to have a far more power engine (well the same power, half the volume of the VF-0's EGF conventional engine), while the airframe was half the volume as well, the VF-0 was likely thought to be underpowered. Given the time constraints in its construction, the VF-0 deficiencies were appareant and therefore in the absence of a major redesign, or a new engine (which was unlikely, since it seems that the EGF engine was the last conventional engine, before Thermonuclear were deployed), rockets were bolted on in order to increase its emergency thrust.

(edited for typos and clarity)

don't be so sure about that. People have been predicting that such and such weapon advance will make such and such obsolete. And still developers have come up with varying ways of countering new "wonder weapons." Tanks were predicted to be obsolete by the 1970s because of advances in guided missile technology, and today they still are around. Furthermore we have British AFV prototypes that use electromagnetic fields that can defeat HEAT warheads. Those two technologies you listed have major power issues that make it very unlikely that we will ever see them on the battlefield in the near future.

I might have had a good reply for low viz lurker's post, had it not been 2 pages long, and coherent in its thoughts. As is, its as impenetrable a post as I have ever seen.

I went as Kim Jong Il last year, I grew my hair for a month into a poof, bought a military green jump suit from an army surplus store, as well as a pair of really bad aviator glasses. Spitting image.

Now Im in Wales, and I guess they don't value halloween as we do.

Having not seen episode five... and always being the kid who opened his christmas presents early I wanted to put in one point. One thing I like about Zero, is that it made Macross MORE believable. I mean there was far more explaination of baseline technologies than any other series. Stuff like tolerences for changing modes, energy armor, and helmet mounted sights grounded the universe on harder technological grounds, than any other of the series. The helmet mounted sights struck me particularly because my friend is in the cutting edge of this field in science, and to have kawamori use it made it extremely believable. Watching a F-14 easily getting trashed by a SV-51 by its versatility just made it all the more so.

I also have the suspicion that it also bridges the gap between Macross 7 and SDF and Plus. People often just don't get how all the series are so different, and I think zero might try to explain it. I'm not too sure about it but once I have watched episode 5 i'll see what I think then.

Those cones are about as useful and stylish as the tailfins of a 1959 cadillac

haha, Nice try CH, if they COULD come up with new stuff, they probably would. Instead they just pawn off endless rehashes of the same product. Even the "new" stuff is just a variation on old stuff: Gamma = VF-X-4 anybody? Someone I know associated with HG called the uniform and technical designs terrible that should have been left behind in the 80s. I'm sorry RT is a poor poor show, and to use an Agent one expression, shadow force's excellent new designs is just a sign of more lameness.

At least Kawamori's macross has a logical progression, has at least some grounding in realism (I think M:0 did that extremely well), and is original, instead of hacking up 20 year old designs and calling it there own. Count the number of new designs that RT has developed even in its new comic books or whatever, then look at what Macross has come up with. In M:0, for all its faults as a series, at least Kawamori was able to update the designs, making them look more modern, while at the same time placing them in the time line with believablilty (you want to argue that point CH be my guest, I'll be happy to show you how it is believable, and then I'll put robotech in its place). By your argument we would not have a YF-21, or 19, or 17, 9, 4 ect, because human technology (in your eyes) can't occur that quickly. So instead Macross would just relaunch the same designs over and over again.

And if you think that Macross is all about selling goods, I'd say that you're very mistaken, especially if you compare it to Gundam, or even your prized robotech. Kawamori I believe, really loves what he does, designing new fighters and creating new storylines. Read his interview for advanced valkyrie on the main page, and you get a sense of that. If he really wants to sell out, and make more profit, he'd just go make gundams, or sell out macross into a gundam type franchise.

the claws show offer no reason for the change, it apparently has these big arms that seem to work good, why'd they take them off for the final version?

not having seen episode five, I can only surmise that maybe they developed a system on later monsters where it could more securely anchor itself to the ground... by whatever method, magnetics, grav field, ect.

I can see this being the next vs thread.

AFOS vs Glavil

what if the Bird Man just goes back to sleep again and wakes up in another Macross series and then destroys Earth? Impending doom.

Comes back to destroy earth? what earth is there left to destroy? I don't think its possible to do much more damage than 4 million Zentredi did three years later.

Oh god, I forgot Contra, UN squadron/area88, Street Fighter 2 (Who spent a month straight learning Shoryuken and the spinning pile driver and can still do it to this day?)

Strikers 1945. It was the best top down shooter ever made, like the pinnacle of a genre.

Also Macross VFX2 is up there. five years on and its still a great game to play. Unfortunately I lost my copy. IS anybody willing to sell theirs?

Ahh,this is a thread I am an expert at. I pretty well play only play old games now. Why? Because I think Gameplay has actually regressed since the mid 90s. So many of the games just reuse the third person perspective, same keys same everything. I just get tired of it.

#1- Xcom UFO defence. Just stunning. One of the greatest games ever, and I break it out once in awhile on my old 486 just to teach the etherals who is boss.

#2- Starcraft. maybe the most balanced game ever made. Excellent gameplay, graphics that don't look dated even today.

#3 Most Final Fantasys BEFORE 7 + Final Fantasy Tactics. Every Final Fantasy Since 7 is just a plain copy of its predecessor, with storyline that is basically the same and updated graphics. The best however is FF tactics. By far, it blows all of the FF games on gameplay, story, and feel

#4 Goldeneye/Perfect Dark. What is better than breaking out the old N-64 with friends just to relive drunken highschool parties?

#5 MarioKart Super or 64.

#6 Quake. I've played it recently against some friends with an old lan they have, and its still just as fun as before.

#7 The legend of Zelda and Zelda. Another game I play time to time

#8 Metal Gear Solid. I don't know what it is about this game, except that it just feels right. IT was one of the first third person shooters to look good, that really has become all the rage.

#9 Front Mission 3. god why don't they make more games like this.

#10 Grand Theft auto 2. I think it was the last good GTA. It had stylish graphics, and improved gameplay from 1.

Notice how I didn't say GTA 3 or any of its derivatives. Thats because they are all the same. there is no difference between them all.

Hahaha, this takes me back...

I go for devestator as well... man who could forget the bucket foot?

Probably wouldn't hear about it, because its a sad truth that the west doesn't care too much about these states. Rwanda anyone?

... this is one of those african civil wars that just breaks people's hearts.... during the 1990s these two countries were slaughtering each other and were in the grips of massive famine. And then they spend hundreds of millions on modern fighters instead of their own people... just terrible.

Although, I must admit, the attraction of the bush league pilot is there... you as one pilot are an airforce of one.

.... still though... with such suffering going on...

Probably Czech, not Russian, but great stuff in any case. Neat find, Shin!

It is czech

Its a Iranian modification, likely during the Iran Iraq war, where they were getting no advanced missiles of any kind, except for two, the Hawk and the TOW, that were being funnelled through the Iran CONTRA pipeline. These hawks likely came from israel. The missile shortage was so acute that they were likely forced to undertake this modification.

edit... you already knew they were from Iran.... but they are likely Isreali, or American models, and NOT IHawks... the US was too hesitant to ship those over at first. I don't know the ammount of modification they recieved... as my knowledge of this stems only about the whole Iran Contra affair.

Damn graham, I was about to say that about the Monster's arms. The original arms were always missile launchers, so its not suprising that this version has them, actually it follows continuity to some degree.

Also I want to point something else out....

Each Macross series has the Monster in it.

9

Though I'm a bit young for most of those games. I got an NES when I was 5... give me games from the early 1990s and I'd do a hell of a lot better.