Agent-GHQ Posted January 22, 2006 Share Posted January 22, 2006 Who thinks that the defeat of Zentradi was the result of the SDF-1, the Valkyries, or the Grand Cannyon? As I was evaluating the story, I think the real hereos are the 60,000 civilians onboard the Macross and of course Lyn Mimei. Despite the battles, it was the culture and the music that shock the Zentradies. Recall the kissing that they witnessed. The kisss alone caused an impact which impaired their judment to fight or resorted to fighting. Let me know what your evaluation are as to who the real heroes are that made a major impact on defeating the Zentradies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zentrandude Posted January 22, 2006 Share Posted January 22, 2006 We were never defeated. You see we was in civil war when we first encountered culture and the puny microns joined us helped us teach the others by music or gunfire. I say minmay for the guys or max for the girls one at a time Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Posted January 22, 2006 Share Posted January 22, 2006 I say minmay for the guys or max for the girls one at a time 362914[/snapback] No sloppy seconds for me, thank you very much! Graham Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JB0 Posted January 22, 2006 Share Posted January 22, 2006 Who thinks that the defeat of Zentradi was the result of the SDF-1, the Valkyries, or the Grand Cannon? What about the zentradi defectors? Without their knowledge of fleet construction, the zentradi psyche, and zent military strategy, the final battle would've been unwinnable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeathHammer Posted January 22, 2006 Share Posted January 22, 2006 (edited) Please Delete Thanks Edited February 9, 2010 by DeathHammer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myk Posted January 22, 2006 Share Posted January 22, 2006 God... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nightbat Posted January 22, 2006 Share Posted January 22, 2006 God... 363037[/snapback] I deny all involvement but you can thank me for giving humans the talent to make cartoons Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hurin Posted January 22, 2006 Share Posted January 22, 2006 Were there plans to build a second (or even more) Grand Cannons (in the southern hemisphere, for example) as there were in RT? H Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JB0 Posted January 22, 2006 Share Posted January 22, 2006 Probably a combination of events, if you are referring to the battle in EP27. I don't think anyone expected the Grand Cannon to fire. It thinned the herd while Bretai's fleet and Minmeis singing punched a hole for SDF Macross to cap Dolza. They mentioned in the show that the Grand Cannon actually cleared most of the path to the main ship. Saved them a lot of work, since their original plan had them smacking lesser flagships to thin the heard. The Grand Cannon itself was kind of baffling. From one perspective, it makes sense that a conventional fleet would probably get wiped out like the ARMDs, Earth couldn't construct enough vessels to battle 5 million ships, and it doesn't appear the humans had any other choice defensively. On the other hand, it would be totally useless once the Zentraedi were on the ground and was basically a one shot weapon. The grand cannon was a first strike weapon. You could batter fleets in orbit before they landed, and thin the enemy ranks. Of course, no one on Earth considered a fleet large enough to just crush all Earth's defenses with orbital bombardment. Were there plans to build a second (or even more) Grand Cannons (in the southern hemisphere, for example) as there were in RT? Yes. http://macross.anime.net/story/atlas/index.html lists five, including a lunar one. ... Which poses an interesting question... if the grand cannon is gravitationally powered, would a Lunar one be a tenth as powerful as a terrestrial one, or just take 10 times longer to charge? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeathHammer Posted January 22, 2006 Share Posted January 22, 2006 (edited) Please Delete Thanks Edited February 9, 2010 by DeathHammer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JB0 Posted January 23, 2006 Share Posted January 23, 2006 Well I think the Grand Cannon raises alot of interesting questions. Once it fires, the enemy knows where it is located. Assuming some survived. Seems like the best strategy then would be for the enemy to back off, locate the Cannon on the ground and take it out. (ala Guns Of The Navarone / BSG TOS Gun On Ice Station Zero) Consider that, guess it makes you wonder how well the Grand Cannon was defended on the surface? And more immediatly... as soon as it starts charging, the enemy can see it. If you can't finish the job with one shot, they can unload everything they have left right down the barrel. Also would five Cannons plus the Lunar one give Earth enough coverage? 4 + lunar, actually. Presumably they wanted to stud the planet with a dozen or so eventually. The Alaska one was the only completed Grand Cannon at the time of the battle. Whats the range on the Cannon? Obviously the farther away you can detect the enemy and the farthest effective range of the weapon means you can hammer the enemy before they can set up and get into their own firing range. Good question... Depends on how strong the beam confinement is, how adjustable the focal point is(assuming it has one instead of being a cylinder), and how fast it loses energy to the outside world(the fact that it glows means it's losing a lot of energy, which is supported by near-miss destructions). The firing plot on the Macross' bridge indicated it fans out rapidly, which greatly limits range. A range reaching lunar orbit could be a dangerous prospect if you accidentally blast your lunar colonies while attacking an enemy, especially given the rate of beam expansion. It likely has a sub-lunar range, though the computer could over-ride a firing command that would result in lunar bombardment. As your enemy gets more distant, the utility of a unguided weapon becomes much lower. In space combat, you can easily get combat ranges where unguided weaponry is essentially useless. Practically speaking, weapon range becomes irrelevant past 1 or 2 light minutes, as your enemy will be changing positions often to avoid incoming vollys from a distant enemy. The Grand Cannon should have a longer operational distance due to the raw beam width and spreading due both to poor focus and planetary rotation. Instead of a straight line(or cone), it arcs and hits a much wider area, similar to rapidly waving a flashlight. This reduces the damage a single shot can do to a given target, but there's so much power that it doesn't really seem to matter matter if the whole beam hits one point(or if it even hits, given the backwash destructions). Unfortunately, you can't aim much. Whats the ecological effect from firing the Cannon? Obviously its a better option than the Rain of Death, but I'm trying to imagine Earth with the debris of 5 million destroyed ships (ones not completely incinerated I guess)Â floating around it. Most of the ships folded out with the destruction of the flagship. http://macross.anime.net/mecha/zentradi/index.html The Grand Cannon wasted roughly 800 thousand. A lot of that debris was probably launched out of orbit. The grand cannon imparted a LOT of energy when it hit, so I would assume that most of the debris from GC'ed ships was sent flying outward. Adding to that, the ships were broken down into very small parts, so solar wind probably helped sweep the debris out. Another million were destroyed through subsequent combat and the flagship's destruction. This is a bit of a question mark, as we don't know what form of attack brought them down. Could be anything from a simple mechanical failure(hell of a time for the reactor's fuel injector to fail...) to reaction missiles to a Macross Cannon-type weapon(there was at least 1 such gun active in the Human-Zentradi alliance, as Britai's vessel was equipped with a similar cannon to the Macross, but the Macross' own cannon was likely disabled due to the pinpoint barrier system). The remaining 3 million folded out to join other fleets. We know from the show that some ships crashed mostly intact. These are almost certainly all non-cannon casualties. They would have an effect similar to a moderately-sized meteor. Really rather trivial relative to the damage the bombardment had already done(which had put mroe than it's fair share of dust in the air already). Debris from exploded vessels would have burned up in the atmosphere(smaller chunks = more exposed surface area = faster burn), filling it with nasty metallic particles and industrial chemicals and so on. These are the bigger problem, partially because they're toxic instead of just "nuclear winter"-inducing and partially because they're likely the majority of the debris. Undoubtedly, a major part of the "Start of nature reclaimation project. Earth ecosystem rehabilitation begins" entry in the chronology is the construction of massive air filters to reduce particles in the air and toxic chemicals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Macross73 Posted January 23, 2006 Share Posted January 23, 2006 yep, the grand cannon cleared the way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1/1 LowViz Lurker Posted January 24, 2006 Share Posted January 24, 2006 (edited) I would say the grand cannon. But I also have to give credit to exedol for coming up with the idea of using minmay to culture shock them in the first place. They needed that moment of confusion to give the killing blow that would take out thier leader. Zentradi are supposed to be pretty dumb and ignorant about anything not to do with war, so I can totally believe that music and strange alien activity involving pressing lips together would hold thier attention long enough for it to work. At the least the people who had never heard of music in thier life would be very curious and have a lapse in concentration. Anyway without Exedol's knowledge of zentradi battle tactics the result might have been different. Max and milia probably helped a lot though. Those two must have ploughed through heaps of cannon fodder zentradi with thier suped-up valks. They should make a videogame similar to the star wars "rogue squadron" series of games on that one big battle alone. Edited January 24, 2006 by 1/1 LowViz Lurker Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myk Posted January 24, 2006 Share Posted January 24, 2006 Machines and their efforts are only as good as the people behind them. It's all about the people... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ComicKaze Posted January 24, 2006 Share Posted January 24, 2006 Who thinks that the defeat of Zentradi was the result of the SDF-1, the Valkyries, or the Grand Cannyon?As I was evaluating the story, I think the real hereos are the 60,000 civilians onboard the Macross and of course Lyn Mimei. Despite the battles, it was the culture and the music that shock the Zentradies. Recall the kissing that they witnessed. The kisss alone caused an impact which impaired their judment to fight or resorted to fighting. Let me know what your evaluation are as to who the real heroes are that made a major impact on defeating the Zentradies. 362903[/snapback] Uhh...I think that WAS the point of the story that was supposed to be clear to everybody already. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpacyAce2012 Posted February 1, 2006 Share Posted February 1, 2006 The Grand Cannon was the most instrumental in the victory at the end of Space War One. Considering the size of the allied fleet in comparison to the Bodol Fleet, the "Minmei Operation" was one hell of a long shot. The Grand Cannon jumped the odds of success up big time. Those morons in the U.N. Armed Forces top brass ended up doing something right,after all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kanata67 Posted February 3, 2006 Share Posted February 3, 2006 uhm... gravity well... never understood why they just didn't push a huge ass rock into the planet and be done with it. Great... you have a cannon on the moon... the moon is now fragmented and plunging towards the earth... I'd say inbreeding more than anything else Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duke Togo Posted February 4, 2006 Share Posted February 4, 2006 Agent One was the real hero of Macross. I saw him tear a Zentradi in half once with his bare hands. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agent ONE Posted February 4, 2006 Share Posted February 4, 2006 Agent One was the real hero of Macross. I saw him tear a Zentradi in half once with his bare hands. 366484[/snapback] Yeah, that was awesome, however the real service I do for Macross is defending its reputation by reminding everyone that M7 was a horrible mistake and most of us hate it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JB0 Posted February 4, 2006 Share Posted February 4, 2006 ARGH! It's bad enough that it's impossible to HAVE a Macross 7 thread without you dragging it into other threads. You aren't doing anyone a service with this absurd obsession. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agent ONE Posted February 4, 2006 Share Posted February 4, 2006 ARGH!It's bad enough that it's impossible to HAVE a Macross 7 thread without you dragging it into other threads. You aren't doing anyone a service with this absurd obsession. 366756[/snapback] Most of your posts never have to do with the thread subjece, but are directly at me... Maybe YOU are the one with an absurd obsession. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JB0 Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 *sighs* Everyone knows you hate Macross 7. Everyone also knows you lack the self-control to not share this opinion every time you see a seven. Can you at least WAIT until that numeral shows up before you start ranting, though? And my on-topic to off-topic ratio is rather high. My on-topic to A1-reference ratio is higher still. My on-topic to "actively disrupting any attempt at real discussion of damn near anything other than my own biceps " ratio is positively ASTRONOMICAL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agent ONE Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 *sighs*Everyone knows you hate Macross 7. Everyone also knows you lack the self-control to not share this opinion every time you see a seven. Can you at least WAIT until that numeral shows up before you start ranting, though? And my on-topic to off-topic ratio is rather high. My on-topic to A1-reference ratio is higher still. My on-topic to "actively disrupting any attempt at real discussion of damn near anything other than my own biceps " ratio is positively ASTRONOMICAL. 366840[/snapback] AAAAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAA!!!! The most important issue here is that I am awesome... You say this crap like I care about what "kind" of posts I make. I say what I wanna say. And now I wanna say that you are a loser. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpacyAce2012 Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 So much for this interesting hypothetical discussion thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myk Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 (edited) I'll take care of that... There are no heroes in the Macross universe. With all of the destruction and loss of life that ensued, whether in DYRL or the t.v. series, I fail to recognize any sort of victory or other cause to celebrate. For all intents and purposes I personally believe in wiping out your enemies from existence, however even I know that there are no heroes in war! Edited February 5, 2006 by myk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hurin Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 For all intents and purposes I personally believe in wiping out your enemies from existence, however even I know that there are no heroes in war! 366884[/snapback] Isn't that sorta like saying that there is never a good side or a bad side in a war? Which, I realize is fashionable nowadays, but. . . really? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpacyAce2012 Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 I'll take care of that...There are no heroes in the Macross universe. With all of the destruction and loss of life that ensued, whether in DYRL or the t.v. series, I fail to recognize any sort of victory or other cause to celebrate. For all intents and purposes I personally believe in wiping out your enemies from existence, however even I know that there are no heroes in war! 366884[/snapback] " There are no real heroes in war. Only survivors." I can't remember where I heard that quote from. But it rings true in many instances. However, there are people who tackle horrible situations with extraordinary courage and spirit. So, heroes do pop up in war. And in Macross. However, war isn't always about "shades of gray". Gorg Bodolzaa was a genocidal SOB in Macross, and thus, was the "bad guy". The allied fleet (Macross/Adoclass/Direct Defence Fleet) were the definite "good guys". Classic "good vs. evil" scenario. But you do make a good point. The results seen in the aftermath stifle any cause for joyus celebration. No ticker-tape parades. Just the grim work of picking up the pieces and restoring the results of 5000 years of hard work just blasted to hell. But Macross wasn't intended to be entirely a happy story, after all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agent ONE Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 For all intents and purposes I personally believe in wiping out your enemies from existence, however even I know that there are no heroes in war! 366884[/snapback] Isn't that sorta like saying that there is never a good side or a bad side in a war? Which, I realize is fashionable nowadays, but. . . really? 366892[/snapback] Yep, just liberal mentality... I have always thought a hero of war would be someone who offed the most people while using the smallest amount of rescources. Like a kill to doller ratio. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myk Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 (edited) Fashionable? Lol. Fashion is irrelevant and an odd concept to mention when you're talking about taking life for the sake of a territorial dispute, whether in deep space or oil fields in the Middle East. AS I SAID, slaughtering your enemy, banishing them into non-existence is perfectly fine with me, after all it's what should have happened in Iraq instead of the bloody impasse that exists now, I just don't think that the act of doing so is heroic. If some of you find murder on a grand scale to be something to sing about then knock yourself out... Now, I've got some freckles to count... Edited February 5, 2006 by myk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hurin Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 (edited) Yes, "fashionable". . . As in: It makes people feel cool and hip to believe such things. . . Dictionary defitntion of "fashionable": Conforming to the current style; stylish. It's been very fashionable for quite some time now among the Hollywood set and intellectual/media circles to be very, very relatavist and post-modern in one's worldview. Those who do not conform to such views are considered old-fashioned, uninformed, or simply stupid. . . but most of all, they are considered very, very uncool. Getting close to politics now. . . so I'll leave it at that . I went out of my way to stay away from such words as liberal or conservative. H P.S. It ain't "murder" if the other guy is trying to kill you. Can we try to be a little less simplistic in our terminology here? Otherwise, this thread's heading for trouble. Edited February 5, 2006 by Hurin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sdf-1 Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 Is this a good idea to talk about in MW... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myk Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 'Fraid trouble's already been here. Why over-complicate a simple concept as murder? Murder is what it is, despite the context of how, where and why it happened. Don't get me wrong though, there are plenty of circumstances where murder is appropriate, such as when giant 50 foot aliens try to incinerate you, some punk tries to rob you, your next door neighbor's kid drops your 'Low Vis, etc.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hurin Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 Why over-complicate a simple concept as murder? Murder is what it is, despite the context of how, where and why it happened.366932[/snapback] I think you might have an odd understanding of the word "murder." "Murder" and "kill" are not synonymous. To kill is to extinguish life. To murder is to kill unjustly. Or, again, a dictionary is helpful: 1. The unlawful killing of one human by another, especially with premeditated malice. Accidentally killing someone with your car is not murder. Killing someone in self-defense is not murder. Killing an enemy soldier on the beaches of Normandy is not murder. Incidentally, the "Thou shalt not kill" commandment was originally "Thou shalt not murder." Only recently has it been translated as "kill." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yellowlightman Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 Yep, just liberal mentality... I have always thought a hero of war would be someone who offed the most people while using the smallest amount of rescources. Like a kill to doller ratio. 366910[/snapback] So the murder of 6 million people in an efficient, orderly way probably makes you a big fan of the Nazi party, eh? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myk Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 (edited) Kill Unjustly? Who is to say what is just? Don't think that killing a soldier on the beaches of Normandy is murder? Try telling that to the family or the people of the dead soldier, whether Allied or German, and I'm sure they'd disagree with you. I know of a local kid who served as a Ranger in Iraq but was killed last year. As far as we're concerned here, he was murdered by insurgents. From the perspective of the people who ended this boy's life it was a killing in defense of their ideals, flock of camels, whatever. It's about relativity my friend, and a dictionary isn't necessary for that. From the human's point of view, they killed justly to defend their planet and the fate of mankind, as the invading forces were unjustly murderous and intended to destroy the human race. From the alien's point of view, humans were just as dangerous to their existence and the following assault against Earth was to keep mankind from being a mortal threat to them. Each side could cry self-defense and justful killing on their part, and cry murderous intent on the part of their opponent. Which group is merely a group of killers, and which is a group of murderers? I don't know, it depends on how we want to look at it. The point I am trying to drive home in response to the title of this thread is that no one's hands are clean in war and heroicism is irrelevant... Edited February 5, 2006 by myk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.