Mephistopheles

Yeah. It'd be cool if it had a slightly different gun pod too.

I agree completely .... the VF-1 rules!! 413194[/snapback] The other VFs don't make very good toys, especially the YF-19.

Personally I like it when they stray from "canon" from time to time as long as it is plausible. If they came out with new types of fast packs for the VF-1 it wouldn't bother me or if they went into a 'what if' scenario and based the design of the VF-1 off a different plane -- like if it was based off the F-22 or Su-34 instead of the F-14.

All of those questions occurred to everyone else too. But most dimissed them as soon as they realized that the scenes would have sucked had it been handled according to the upper limit of his abilities. You might as well ask why they didn't just use one of the Eagles to take the Ring to Mount Doom in LotR. . . because then there'd be no story! So, again, your point is taken. . . but these are comic book movies! I felt about the way you do here when Spider-Man suddenly became Superman in Spider-Man 2. I thought the way he stopped the run-away train was waaay beyond Spidey's abilities and more into Superman realm. But, then I decided I didn't care and enjoyed the movie. H 413126[/snapback] The difference between Spideman's display of power and Supermans is that Spiderman never went backwards in terms of strength. While I will agree that Spiderman probably lacks the physical strength to stop a train, the way they did the scene leaves some believability to it. Superman on the other hand is extremely inconsistent with his powers even in the comic books. That is one of the reasons why I could never really get into Superman comic books. Superman is simply too super. If they were consistent with his powers then only a handful of his enemies could go head to head with him. The movies make it even worse as most of the time he either fights some sort of disaster or somebody who doesn't stand a chance against him. That is boring to watch. Spiderman has enemies that are at least equal in power which makes it much more entertaining to watch. As for the Lord of the Rings thing, they say the only reason why the hobbits are taking the ring is because they don't succumb to the power of the ring as easily as others do. I'm not sure if the eagles are the same however there was always the possibility of the eagles getting intercepted by the... nazg... .... ... evil dudes who ride the dragon things.

A battle damaged VF-1J.

Well, not to take any of this too seriously, but the trick is to do it right, you can't stop a plane instantly, it would disintegrate and kill everyone aboard. Likewise, pushing that crystal continent too fast might have just made it break up. Of course, that Boeing 777 would have disintegrated long before Superman even arrived, so let's not look into this too much! 413100[/snapback] I'm aware of that however he sure put some considerable effort into trying to stop it when it wouldn't have been that hard for him to slow it to a stop. Additionally, it took him a few seconds to get from the bar to where the plane was but once he got within a few hundred yards of it he could barely keep up with it. What happened? Did he run out of NOS?

They need to make Superman's powers more consistent. One moment he can fly so fast that he goes back in time and the next moment he can barely catch up with a free-falling aircraft. One moment he can lift an entire continent made out of Kryptonite and hurl it into space and the next moment he is barely able to lift an airplane. What is going on here? Why does Superman even bother slowing down and talking to Lex on the island? Why not just swoop in really fast and pick him up? There was no need for him to stop and walk towards him. When will Superman fight somebody that is at least challenging? He has more enemies than Lex Luthor and environmental disasters. I'd say, out of all the movies, Superman's greatest nemesis is gravity. In Superman Returns there seemed to be no direction. What was the point of the movie? Nothing changed after Superman got back.

I still confident that was merely lack of planning on part of the series creators. It also has to do with 1980's designs versus 2000's designs. You have to take other things into consideration, the design was obviously modelled after a bird which fits into the other elements of Macross Zero. They needed an aircraft the presented a challenge to the VF-0 otherwise the story would have merely been Roy shooting down the AUN aircraft. In order for them to create an exciting story they had to throw some logic into the wind. Somewhat like the episode of Macross where they blow a hole in the Zentran ship to throw Breetai out but then spend their time cutting a hole through an airlock in order to escape rather than go through the hole they just made. In Macross Zero they mention that individual countries must annouce their technological advancements to the rest of the world. Well, since it was developed by the Anti-UN they probably didn't follow those rules and had a head start on the project or perhaps they had a better strategy for development and testing of their aircraft. It could easily be explained as the AUN having a head start. However the SV-51 isn't fully explained so it might not have actually been a better aircraft than the VF-1. As I said in my previous post, the aircraft seemed to be much more complicated than the VF-0 and the VF-1 which means maintaining it is harder and production costs are up. The SV-51 doesn't seem like it could easily be adapted to aircraft carriers nor does it seem like it could carry a payload as heavy as the VF-0/1. It may not have faired in space as well either.

I did see that same translated line in my Macross Zero fan-sub. I really don't think the creators thought it out when they designed the SV-51. I'm pretty sure they just went for a design that was cool and different. Additionally, some aspects of the VF-0 were more aerodynamic than the VF-1. See, you have to consider that the VF-1 was designed in the early 1980s and the SV-51 was designed sometime after 2000. They had to purposely dumb down the VF-0 however they had a bit more free reign with the SV-51. Had Macross Zero not been related to Macross, I'd bet that the VF-0 would be just as cool. On a design note, the SV-51 would be a nightmare to maintain as it has a much more complicated transformation. It also looks like it can't take much of a physical beating.

They really need to make a good Macross game for the computer which can handle mix-mode environments better along with having better controls such as a joy stick and pedals which I use for BF2. Well, maybe they can actually make a good one for the PS3 or Xbox 360. They also need to find a better design studio.

Old Bruno lives well after the attack and manages to get elected into the new "Unity Government" at around 2016. It is at this time that Breetai is appointed Commander over the SPACY fleet, essentially taking over where Global left off. 412925[/snapback] Yep and all this magically goes away in Robotech. Breetai's fleet disappears. Nobody seems to be able to recall the previous war with the Zentran. The Zentran as a whole disappear. The mecha seems to go backwards in terms of technology. Of course it is all due to Robotech being three completely different shows merged together but the transistion between each third of the series is a very rough one. It'd be nice if Harmony Gold just dropped the whole Robotech thing and treat the shows as individual shows.

I thought it was odd that the bridge crew died in Robotech when you can clearly see that the bridge is completely intact after Kamjin/Kyron rammed them ... of course after finding out what Robotech really was I saw why they killed them off. 412882[/snapback] I thought they avoided showing the final shot of the damaged but undestroyed Macross in Robotech for that reason. It's been ages though, and the last time I saw it was on Cartoon "Let's edit a pre-edited show because we'd like more commercials" Network. I was more bothered by the lack of SDF-2 either way. 412883[/snapback] They made a very clear shot. Kamjin's ship hits the right shoulder of the SDF-1 and you can still see what is left of both cannons and the bridge sitting right inbetween them. All Kamjin did was destroy the right arm and shoulder along with the outer right edge of the SDF-1's torso. I watched the sequence just a few minutes ago to be sure. Kyron should have said "Damn it!" before he died because he failed.

I thought it was odd that the bridge crew died in Robotech when you can clearly see that the bridge is completely intact after Kamjin/Kyron rammed them ... of course after finding out what Robotech really was I saw why they killed them off.

Like the one where they change the instructions on all shampoo bottles to say "rinse and repeat" so that they could conquer the world while everyone was busy endlessly washing their hair the shower? The sad part is that seems like a more thoughtout plan than the ones some of these 'masterminds' come up with.

Watching Superman Returns was like watching a fight between God and a cripple. They really need to give him another villian. He fights Lex Luthor in virtually every movie. Where is Bizarro or Darksied when you need him?

Personally I'd like to see them restart the series -- redo the orginal TV series and nothing more. The best way to ruin a series is by continually adding to it. Other than that, I personally like 'What if' series if they do make additional ones.

In space the only thing that would "slow" something down is inertia. They could put a booster pack on any of the destroids and had them fly just as fast as the Valkyries and maneuver as well as any of the Valkyries. The Valkyries only hold the speed advantage in an atmosphere. However we are talking about a fictional war using fictional weapons designed by somebody who is not a military tactics expert so it has many, many flaws in the show. However if you want to look at it realistically then the Valkyrie pilots would be blacking out in half of the maneuvers they pull. Additionally, provided your enemy can at least aim, or think logically when aiming, no pilot would be able to dodge the sheer volume of missiles and gun fire coming at them as you see in Macross. When firing at a moving enemy it is best to either aim where you think they will go then fire in the spot continuously or fire well ahead of them and bring the fire towards them so they collide with it. You can also choose a spread pattern in which you quickly fire at the places you think they will go if you believe they will change direction. I use these firing techniques in everything from games, to paintball, to military OPFOR simulations** to hunting with fairly high success rate. However it is much easier on everyone working on the series to use the classic noobs versus elite scenarios, you don't have to put a lot of thought or research into it and it is generally easier to animate. Gundam uses the same thing. Look at the "cannon fodder" troops; all they do is stand in one spot and shoot around or behind their enemy. Based on that, it is apparant that nobody actually learns how to use their equippment aside from the trigger. Maybe they should concentrate on training a bit more. Additionally the Destroids could have been equipped with an anti-missile system like the TROPHY* system being developed right now. Although the destroids were designed in the 1980's so the TROPHY system wasn't publicly announced. The battles would also have taken place at longer ranges. Right now fighters can track over ten targets, from ten different directions, at ranges over fifteen miles and engage them. Macross attack range seems to be about a few hundred meters aside from the large cannons on the ships. Other weapons could have been utilized. Rather then send out a bunch of space fighters they could have just launched masses of scrap metal with explosives in them and blew them up when enemy pods were around. The sharpnel from the explosion would be moving well over the speed of sound (in air) and kept going until it collided with something. Proximity based missiles work extremely well in space. What they should of had was something along the lines of a flak cannon because the armor of the Zentran forces doesn't seem to be that strong. Additionally, anything that fires projectiles has infinite range in space so they could have engaged enemy pods with perfect accuracy as far as their sighting mechanisms would allow. However, it was just a TV show so I cut it tons of breaks especially when it comes to hearing explosions in the middle of space. After all, if they fought realistically it would probably be boring to watch. *If you are unaware of what the TROPHY system is, it was developed for tanks and helicopters which tracks incoming projectiles, shoots a classified particle beam at them which prematurely detonates the warhead. Obviously it only works on missiles and rockets. The system has gone through many successful test and should be implemented in the near future. They are also working on the TROPHY II system which is intended to stop all projectiles. **I am in the military and I often participate in OPFOR which is basically laser-tag military style.

GERWALK can't reverse. It's not in the feature set. And you CAN use GERWALK for an instant stop in Battlecry. Hit down on the transformation control. You just don't get the cinematic flailing about. 412236[/snapback] It actually can reverse as they occasionally do it. Most of the time it is for a quick direction change. They'll use it to stop, then roll over and face the other direction which can't be done in Battlecry. Gerwalk mode could provide rearward flight in space by pointing the feet forward although in an atmosphere it may not work and if it did it would be limited. Anyway, the biggest problem with Battlecry is that the only way to face another direction is to rotate on the Z-axis as the game lacks 360 degree motion on the Y-axis. Battlecry has no physics either. I can be flying at top speed in fighter mode then turn in battlroid configuration and be at an instant stop despite how there is nothing providing rearward thrust to stop me. I'd rather have a Macross or Robotech game based on a flight simulator. Even Battlefield 2 has decent flight mechanics (although it does have a few problems). I want my enemies to engage me with some determination as well. I don't like it when the enemies fly around on "rails" or merely make a pass, then turn around and make another pass.

Where is the intro VF-1 footage in the "Top Gun" music video from? I've never seen it before. Is it from a game?

I didn't like Battlecry mainly for how the game was designed. Battlecry has no real flight mechanics. You can't do vertical loops because of this which gets really annoying. You can't do any of the maneuvers in the anime such as using gerwalk mode to suddenly decrease your speed then go in reverse. The enemies in the air don't really follow you. They fly from one side of the map towards you then pass by and continue to the other side where they will turn around and repeat. You can't select how many missiles are locked on at a time either. Most of the levels make fighter mode useless aside from quick dashes. Additionally the levels were very small. What Macross games really need is a basic jet combat simulator engine that is modified to make use of the valkyrie's transforming abilities. It would also be nice if we were able to select our payloads rather than having micro-missiles and gun pod only. What about the anti-warship missiles, the anti-mecha missiles, the guns mounted on the head and the cannon on the right-side of the Strike Valkyrie? What about being able to jettison the armor/fast packs if desired/required?

In the episode, I believe twenty-seven, where Earth is bombarded it clearly shows ships splitting in half; I don't recall the ship type though.