Destroids...

[RedWolf]

If Macross Plus and Macross VF-X2 is anything to go by either destroids are for target practice or in the black market. Others like Macross 7 convert them for civilian use.

Ironically further ground mecha development goes to black market arms dealers or terrorist groups. Like the Zentradi Black Rainbow terror group Gjagravan-Va and Critical Path Corporation Annabella Lasiodora.

[Seto Kaiba]

Oh everything's better with Macross II, go to bed old man.

Oh absolutely . In all seriousness, my point was that it makes a great deal more sense for the next-generation destroid to be an evolution of the previous design generation, as in the case of the Macross II destroids, rather than a throwback to one of the earliest (known) destroid designs. Stylistically, upgunning the 50 year old Cheyenne to pass it off as "new" is about as logical as attaching road effects, flame decals, and a big chrome spoiler to an old powder-blue Nissan Stanza.

I stand by my theory that the Frontier fleet is using remodeled ADR-03 Cheyennes because they blew their entire defense budget on VF-25s and keeping SMS on the payroll.

Mac2:LA is probably the only installation of the franchise that I've ever seen real design progression, as far as destroids are concerned. The Mac2:LA version of the Tomahawk, for instance, is just plain scary. I won't even mention thier 'Monster' variant.

To sum it up nicely... "more dakka", though the rollers in the feet were a nice touch, and it's the first appearance of that particular design choice in Macross (though that doesn't necessarily indicate the Cheyenne and Cheyenne II's use of that feature was inspired by Macross II).

If Macross Plus and Macross VF-X2 is anything to go by either destroids are for target practice or in the black market. Others like Macross 7 convert them for civilian use.

Ironically further ground mecha development goes to black market arms dealers or terrorist groups. Like the Zentradi Black Rainbow terror group Gjagravan-Va and Critical Path Corporation Annabella Lasiodora.

Excellent examples, though the earliest example (chronologically) of Anti-U.N. terrorists exceeding the U.N. forces in developing ground mecha would be the two shield-enhanced destroid Monsters used on the planet Bellfan in 2030 in Macross M3.

[VF5SS]

I stand by my theory that the Frontier fleet is using remodeled ADR-03 Cheyennes because they blew their entire defense budget on VF-25s and keeping SMS on the payroll.

write some fanfic all you want, mang. My point is we know why the show's producers did it and it really didn't matter that much. It matters as much to the story as the Destroids themselves. Too bad the way they were reused wasn't as unintentionally funny as the Space AMRAAMs.

To sum it up nicely... "more dakka",

The Macross II destroids are kind of derivative in a bad way. The original quintet was so unique that it's hard to redo them. The Koenig was a better update since it didn't mess with the core design, but gave it a purpose in a show dominated rightly so by robot airplanes.

[Loop]

This is what I found in the Macross Mecha Manual.

"Though mass-produced like the other destroids, only two Monster Mk II units were onboard the SDF-1 Macross during the outbreak of Space War I. During the conflict, the Macross onboard factories made use of equipment for several more Monster mecha and produced a third unit to accompany the original two. Most of the other Monster units were destroyed by orbital bombardment from the Zentradi fleet. The few Monster Mk II units aboard the SDF-1 Macross distinguished themselves as very capable war machines during Space War I. While most destroid units suffered heavy losses, the Monsters aboard the ship remained in active service for most of the war and the capability to launch reaction warheads was put to use during the battle with the Bodol Zer Main Fleet in February 2010."

And this:

"The Mk II Monster was phased out of active service in the 2030's. The continued growth and improved manufacturing of variable vehicles meant the destroids, originally built as much simpler and cheaper robotic weapons, became a less attractive alternative. In the tradition of military training, some Mk II Monster destroids were utilized as target vehicles in live fire test exercises. The YF-19 utilized the special weapons pack in the Super Nova AVF and fired upon a disarmed Mk II Monster target destroid in a live fire exercise conducted at New Edwards Test Flight Center on Eden in 2040."

[taksraven]

"Standardized designs"? I could see that being true if the Cheyenne weren't a fifty year old, obsolete design, and if we hadn't seen in Macross 7 that the Space War 1-era destroids are still in use for a variety of purposes. Maybe after blowing all their money on the VF-25 and SMS the Frontier Government had to cheap out on their anti-aircraft defenses, and that's why they've got souped-up antiques on the battlefield.

OK. SMS went down to the Destroid op-shop and picked up a load of obsolete destroids for a pony. Whatever, just offering an alternative reason. Having different types of units and then god knows how many variants on top of that can be really expensive.

Taksraven

[hulagu]

write some fanfic all you want, mang. My point is we know why the show's producers did it and it really didn't matter that much. It matters as much to the story as the Destroids themselves. Too bad the way they were reused wasn't as unintentionally funny as the Space AMRAAMs.

The Macross II destroids are kind of derivative in a bad way. The original quintet was so unique that it's hard to redo them. The Koenig was a better update since it didn't mess with the core design, but gave it a purpose in a show dominated rightly so by robot airplanes.

One or two excellent designs having a long service lifespan might be reasonable, but EVERY single destroid (and Valkyrie, and Macross) in SDF Macross having a retro looking design successor (not a upgraded refit) nearly a century later is kind of pushing it.

Also, I wouldn't say that the original Cheyenne was obsolete relative to the SDF Macross destroids, just not built for space marine action that was the original purpose of the SDFM destroids, and thus not in the original SDF Macross complement. From what we see of the Cheyenne II, its role is mostly relegated to Island defence.

Edited December 21, 2009 by hulagu

[taksraven]

This is what I found in the Macross Mecha Manual.

While most destroid units suffered heavy losses, the Monsters aboard the ship remained in active service for most of the war and the capability to launch reaction warheads was put to use during the battle with the Bodol Zer Main Fleet in February 2010."

While there are a few other screenshots during episode 27, but this is my favourite "blink and you'll miss it" destroid monster moment, from the final charge....

Distant SDF 1, not much happening......

A bit closer, hmmmmm, what are those strange shapes under the bridge area.......??

Whoa!!! SDF-1 and the two monsters, IN YOUR FACE!!

Love it.....

[VF5SS]

One or two excellent designs having a long service lifespan might be reasonable, but EVERY single destroid (and Valkyrie, and Macross) in SDF Macross having a retro looking design successor (not a upgraded refit) nearly a century later is kind of pushing it.

Also, I wouldn't say that the original Cheyenne was obsolete relative to the SDF Macross destroids, just not built for space marine action that was the original purpose of the SDFM destroids, and thus not in the original SDF Macross complement. From what we see of the Cheyenne II, its role is mostly relegated to Island defence.

I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you, but I am starting to not care about the little things the producers are doing just to squeeze a little more out of their CGI models.

You can pass judgment on it or concoct back-stories (which I am sure Macross Chronicles will do), but it won't change the fact that they did it. Take it as a funny injoke rather than huuuuuuuuuge consequences for the technological development of Macross.

[sketchley]

I translated the Macross Chronicle page on the MF Destroid (AKA Cheyenne II) a while back. There's a logical in-series reason why they chose it, and not one of the "later" destroid designs. If memory serves, it's because of it's smaller size, and greater mobility than the "later" destroids. Basically it can speed around the city streets, and is thin enough to squeeze down the more narrow streets.

Of course, that's why the Macross Frontier NUNS (and it must be stressed ONLY the Macross Frontier NUNS) adopted them. SMS? Probably because the MF NUNS had so many, that using them, too, was economical.

I'm not sure the "they're just recycled CG models" arguement holds water. As the designs have significantly different details (both the wire frame and skin), and the MF Cheyenne II would require significant man-hours of labour to create. Other than the in-series justification, the reasons may simply be a) easier to come up with an upgraded design than a new one from scratch, b) to better tie M0 into Macross in general, c) they were cool background eye-candy in M0. Don't fix what isn't broken, etc..

[RedWolf]

Whoa!!! SDF-1 and the two monsters, IN YOUR FACE!!

Love it.....

You can bet one of those is piloted by those old gezzers on Macross 7.

VF-1J's and Monster II's as part of the pension plan?

[VF5SS]

Basically it can speed around the city streets, and is thin enough to squeeze down the more narrow streets.

Clearly they need to be using Patroids.

I'm not sure the "they're just recycled CG models" arguement holds water. As the designs have significantly different details (both the wire frame and skin), and the MF Cheyenne II would require significant man-hours of labour to create. Other than the in-series justification, the reasons may simply be a) easier to come up with an upgraded design than a new one from scratch, b) to better tie M0 into Macross in general, c) they were cool background eye-candy in M0. Don't fix what isn't broken, etc..

I see that they're not as identical at first glance, but there's still enough similarities. There's over a dozen brand new models in Frontier, wouldn't they take more time than just reworking the Cheyenne?

[hulagu]

You can bet one of those is piloted by those old gezzers on Macross 7.

VF-1J's and Monster II's as part of the pension plan?

The third one would be the one Quamzin captured?

[taksraven]

I translated the Macross Chronicle page on the MF Destroid (AKA Cheyenne II) a while back. There's a logical in-series reason why they chose it, and not one of the "later" destroid designs. If memory serves, it's because of it's smaller size, and greater mobility than the "later" destroids. Basically it can speed around the city streets, and is thin enough to squeeze down the more narrow streets.

Of course, that's why the Macross Frontier NUNS (and it must be stressed ONLY the Macross Frontier NUNS) adopted them. SMS? Probably because the MF NUNS had so many, that using them, too, was economical.

I'm not sure the "they're just recycled CG models" arguement holds water. As the designs have significantly different details (both the wire frame and skin), and the MF Cheyenne II would require significant man-hours of labour to create. Other than the in-series justification, the reasons may simply be a) easier to come up with an upgraded design than a new one from scratch, b) to better tie M0 into Macross in general, c) they were cool background eye-candy in M0. Don't fix what isn't broken, etc..

Good stuff.

Taksraven

[Seto Kaiba]

write some fanfic all you want, mang. My point is we know why the show's producers did it and it really didn't matter that much. It matters as much to the story as the Destroids themselves. Too bad the way they were reused wasn't as unintentionally funny as the Space AMRAAMs.

Not so good at spotting humor, are ya?

Yes, we know that the show's producers did it for a reason, and the joke reflects that...

The Macross II destroids are kind of derivative in a bad way. The original quintet was so unique that it's hard to redo them. The Koenig was a better update since it didn't mess with the core design, but gave it a purpose in a show dominated rightly so by robot airplanes.

I don't have any problem with most of the Macross II destroids... they're background mecha anyway, and get barely any screentime, but they're a reasonably logical set of designs considering the available technological advancements since SW1.

You can pass judgment on it or concoct back-stories (which I am sure Macross Chronicles will do), but it won't change the fact that they did it. Take it as a funny injoke rather than huuuuuuuuuge consequences for the technological development of Macross.

Put that in the past tense and you've got something... they already concocted their excuse.

[anime52k8]

Too bad the way they were reused wasn't as unintentionally funny as the Space AMRAAMs.

wait, what?

[VF5SS]

wait, what?

The VF-171's underwing stores are taken straight out of Macross Zero. Specifically the triple missile cluster, the hexagon shaped missile pod, and the AMRAAM missile as used by the F-14 Kai.

[1/1 LowViz Lurker]

My view on the destroids is this:

they are slower with thicker armor. Probably have longer range. Sit in rows to provide a wall of defense. will be useful in small confined spaces (more compact than a tank in terms of surface area of the feet but probably slower and easier to hit because of height) where not much movement is needed. and they are probably easier to maintain and control so that anyone can use them.

People can ride in them and keep them like people who ride horses as a hobby or want one as a pet.

You don't see them because they lost in favour of the valks which were initially more expensive but were needed more badly than ground robots.

If the zentradi only used reguld and required that pancake shaped dropship to retrieve the reguld after each attack things might have been different. You might have seen more destroids to fight off the reguld. I could imagine a spartan blowing off big chunks of the reguld and finishing it off with a bat to the legs using an baton to crush the legs if it ever got too close.

But they didn't just use reguld so that why valks took over. modular design of the valk means you can equip it with whatever weapons you think the mission would need without changing the basic robot itself. So making valks could save money in the long run.

This is probably why the VB-6 is used because it can still fight off the ground and if needed go into battroid for close-up fighting. (maybe the turning speed is quicker in that mode?)

As for tanks: they co-exist in macross in the future. Just because we don't see them often (they were in frontier weren't they?) doesn't mean they are extinct. The destroid as I mentioned is probably easier to control though at closer range so I think that why they were made. (it is something between a tank and a gun turret - tanks might not be good enough against faster targets, while turret might leave you defencless against heavy weapons) Also if giants ever got to you at close range you have guns at their height-level to shoot them with. (instead of shooting at their ankles) But to me they are not the "anti-giant" mecha like the valks, but more the "anti-giant-mecha" mecha.

Destroids would shoot their fighter pods from the sky, (not moving much from their position and benefitting more from thick armour(like tank) and maybe kill off the regulds that managed to sneak on the sruface. While battroid mode valks would rush to the areas that the destroid couldn't make it in time to kill off the ones that required more speed.

Since there are not large numbers of enemies to deal with (when does space war II start?) I don't think we need tosee destroids as much. But I believe they'd still be useful in a situation where humans were outnumbered again. (which isn't likely to happen) More guns shooting at once = more damage dealt to the enemy in shorter time, in a mass alien invasion scenario.

If think if the ghost drone in macross plus were to ever go crazy again, a group of destroid pilots could easily shoot at it from the ground to take one down and isamu and guld would not have to deal with the problem but that since kawamori wants to highlght the heroic valks, we will never see something like that. I think if there was a non-canon macross videogame where the only missions you do are base defense against air and ground targets who are trying to take control, you would see the destroid as a more-heroic grunt machine. Yes the valks can fly and are probably lighter and faster, but it probably takes more skill to use those too. (learning to fly, being good in three modes instead of one etc)

My guess is that people who fight in space are more skilled in the open and dodging missiles, (all the qrau pilots) while the ground fighters are more focused on shooting because they don't move around as much and can go to areas where there might be cover from the usual micromissile swarms. The ground fighters probably don't have time to dodge so that's why in the tv series you see destroid pilots getting pwned. But think of how many things they shot down before blowing up? You can't say they are "useless" just because you didn't see how much stuff they killed offscreen before the eventual death.

Edited January 13, 2010 by 1/1 LowViz Lurker

[Rbstr]

To me it seems kind of silly to pack a bunch of ground based combat units in a mostly space born fleet.

Destroids a mostly worthless, except for point defense in space...so you only bring the point defense destroid that you might use instead of wasting time and money on the other stuff.

VFs are simply far more useful for space fleets...to the point that a large destroid complement made obsolete.

If they were fighting on the ground on a planet or something it might be different.

Edited January 16, 2010 by Rbstr

[Seto Kaiba]

To me it seems kind of silly to pack a bunch of ground based combat units in a mostly space born fleet.

Destroids a mostly worthless, except for point defense in space...so you only bring the point defense destroid that you might use instead of wasting time and money on the other stuff.

Granted, dragging along a substantial body of ground combat mecha in a long-range colonization fleet is probably not the most efficient use of a defense budget, but with the possible exceptions of the Spartan and Tomahawk series, most of the destroids do have relatively practical defense applications. While the Defender and Phalanx fill the obvious roles as mobile point-defense units to supplement the ship's built-in defenses on an as-needed basis (the greatest point in their favor being their mobile nature, so they can be retasked to wherever the enemy forces are most numerous), the Monster fills in as a self-propelled, somewhat more versatile battleship turret... we've seen just how brutally effective the Monster series was against smaller Zentradi attack craft in DYRL, and the Konig Monster's effectiveness against the Battle Galaxy, so we can't write that off completely. The Tomahawk's not really geared for AA, and the Spartan's a brawler, so the former really is useless except for short-ranged defense, and the Spartan's only real application would probably be construction, a job that could be done just as well by a Valkyrie. That aside, I suppose the real value in them, aside from their obvious point-defense applications, would be planetary/colonial defense once the colony has started to establish itself on a planet.

[DrStrangelove]

VF-1J's and Monster II's as part of the pension plan?

Reaction weapons sold separately...some assembly required

[Killer Robot]

That aside, I suppose the real value in them, aside from their obvious point-defense applications, would be planetary/colonial defense once the colony has started to establish itself on a planet.

That's the other thing. Given there is manufacturing ability on fleets, they'd probably be better off either making the destroids once they settled a planet, or once they were getting near one.

[1/1 LowViz Lurker]

If they were fighting on the ground on a planet or something it might be different.

I think I remember seeing a part in the mars base episode with misa. They rolled a few of the destroids down a ramp including a monster.

I suppose the SDF1 did make good use of them after all. When you think about it, when dealing with aliens you can't really know how effective a certain thing is until an actual battle. Keep in mind the fighting may vary depending on what the enemy is doing. If they are trying to sneak up on you the way kamjin did with his reguld then I can see a destroid being useful there and at least slowing the ground mecha down a little while valks focus on fighting in the air.

Hiding in a canyon, to avoid radar, a fast flying vehicle can be dangerous to pilot. But a mech that is close to the ground might be more suitable in that situation. Since valks can transform they are better all-round robots, but you got to understand that unlike in the gundam shows there are limits to what was available and it seemed to me at least humans didn't actually stand a chance against the zentradi whether they liked it or not. So throwing everything that was available to them was their only choice.

Destroids on the skin of the ship? Go for it. Destroids punching and kicking zentradi in a post apoc world where there is a shortage of ammo after earth was scorched (factories blown up?) and the zentradi had no way of making more of their own weapons because they are too dumb to know that? Go for it! Using the front of a carrier as a fist to punch a hole in a ship to blow it up from the inside out by exploiting the destroids' superior firepower compared to the bare bones valkyrie's little gunpod? Go for it. You see, they had to use unconventional tactics which the aliens weren't ready for. But not to beat them! Just to survive and buy time for people on earth to think of a plan. Humans are outnumbered. You needed ALL the robots (even the semi useless stuff) to pull their weight. If the zentradi wanted to, they could have easily sent everything they had at once but they were afraid of encountering what they believed were the PC.

When you are surrounded, on all sides with giants playing around with you, you are going to need every gun you can get. You don't want any of them getting inside the ship and killing civilians. This is where I think a destroid would be able to fillfull an important role: whenever a group of reguld manage to finally break through the human defenses outside, and the last layer of defense are the guys on the ground. (this is actually what happened in the opening DYRL scene when hikaru had to disobey orders to shoot the few that slipped through the cracks - I'm pretty sure if a few destroids were there to assist in guarding the inside they could have freed him up to focus on his job out there fighting in space)

Yes valks might be cheaper and more effective NOW. But back when the valk was a government secret and they didn't expect aliens to just appear out of nowhere without time for preparations...they had no choice but to rely on it. I think the destroids did provide a useful secondary line of defense for when situations called for less speed and more firepower. The zentradi have far more resources, could have blown up the sdf1 easily, but they were being careful and many times called off attacks. Humans were completely in a defensive position for the majority of the war.

So yeah although they are not as useful as valkyries, they were cheaper and probably easier to maintain at the time, and given how many zentradi there are compared to humans, you can't be too fussy and expect the best pilots to be like superman and be everywhere at all times. (anymore than you can expect a gundam to single handedly defeat the enemy in a war by expecting the enemy to fight one to one instead of exploit their advantages of time and numbers - in gundam federation only had mobile armors and were behind the zeon in robots, so similarly the humans in macross had limited resources and battle experience, which would require using anything available that they had: destroids, probably tanks, dedicated fighters, drones etc)

That's why I mentioned that if humans were outnumbered again (which probably won't ever happen again since they have cloned themselves) then the destroid might still be useful since they would be easier to control than a vakyrie which requires you know how to fly. The training just to control 3 modes is much harder than standing still and guiding a gun only focusing on shooting stuff. Likewise a Qrau pilot using a QRAU and fighting in open space where you can get overwhelmed on all sides, would probably need more skill and discipline to move about in than a reguld pilot using a reguld on the ground which are seen just hopping around and shooting and hiding behind things and using cover. (less speedy reflexes required from you - hiding behind buildings to avoid a miscromissiles swarm is a safe tactic you could use, whereas that wouldn't be an option in space where you have to really dodge or shoot it down with speed)

But because humans have joined forces with zentradi, they are not in a position of weakness anymore and don't have to rely on those unconventional ideas. But SW1 did see a good use for the destroid if only to help fill in any gaps left in the human defense against superior numbers. (just by merely being there to distract or slow down enemies would be useful)

Edited January 19, 2010 by 1/1 LowViz Lurker

[VF5SS]

too gundam to make the cut

[Retracting Head Ter Ter]

Destroids make sense if you go by the background material about them having more armour to take the abuse as compared to lighter skinned valks.

But that all goes to plot hell when in SDFM you see the destroids blow up when lightly caressed by the common Zentran mecha weapons.

[Seto Kaiba]

Destroids make sense if you go by the background material about them having more armour to take the abuse as compared to lighter skinned valks. But that all goes to plot hell when in SDFM you see the destroids blow up when lightly caressed by the common Zentran mecha weapons.

It's not exactly a problem limited to the Space War 1-era destroids, y'know. Unless they were equipped with plot armor because they were carrying a named character, Zentradi beam weapons tended to do pretty much the same thing to the lightly-armored Valkyries of the day as well. Even plot armor didn't save Hikaru's VF-1J from being torn to shreds during hand-to-hand combat, and the only other major instance of Valkyries going into hand-to-hand combat was faked for the benefit of Quamzin... whereas the Spartan at least comported itself reasonably well after the war as a police unit for the specific mission of controlling violent Zentradi.

[Zinjo]

My take on the whole destorid fate was that they became relegated to Marine and land based Army units (no official support of course, just a leap of logic). The "Fleet" really doesn't need them since they have the Valks and all the onboard armaments built into the ships. It's like basing a tank battalion aboard an Aircraft Carrier. Not all that relevant to a carrier's mission.

Since all we've seen of Macross mecha has been related to "fleet" stories, there's really no need to explain the ultimate fate of destroid squads. Considering Kawamori's penchant for Retcon, there's no reason to believe that the records published in the Chronicle will never change.

I tend to feel that Mac II handled the matter better, in that most if not all the destroids we saw were land based units mainly. The redesigns were akin to the Cheyenne series with mobility in mind, since nearly all had wheeled feet.

Now you take a UN Marine force, that battles on land as well as the air and you have different equipment requirements entirely. Why risk a very expensive and complex unit like a variable fighter in ground ops when an updated design of a destroid could do the same job?

The SW1 era destroids were designed like walking tanks with limited mobility and high firepower. The Spartans appeared to be designed for close combat with the giants, but proved to be largely ineffective without long range weaponry. Put a gun pod in the hands of a Spartan and it becomes a much more effective unit.

Ironically the Valks grew larger after SW1 and the destroids grew smaller, if the Cheyenne II is any indicator of where destroid design logic was going.

Personally, I don't think we can definitively say that the destroid question has been finally answered. Only that it has been answered - "FOR NOW"!

If at some point a UN Marine story is produced, we may well see a return of the next generation of destroids. We simply have to wait and see what comes next...

Edited January 21, 2010 by Zinjo

[Seto Kaiba]

The "Fleet" really doesn't need them since they have the Valks and all the onboard armaments built into the ships. It's like basing a tank battalion aboard an Aircraft Carrier. Not all that relevant to a carrier's mission.

In some cases, yes... but there are notable exceptions. Clearly SMS, and to a lesser extent the Macross Frontier fleet, felt that the use of destroids could improve their AA capabilities... hence the widespread use of updated versions of the ADR-03 Cheyenne.

I tend to feel that Mac II handled the matter better, in that most if not all the destroids we saw were land based units mainly. The redesigns were akin to the Cheyenne series with mobility in mind, since nearly all had wheeled feet.

Um... you may want to go back and review the footage. While it's true that the majority of the screen time devoted to the destroids in Macross II depicts their use as mobile anti-aircraft defenses by the U.N.'s ground forces*, the destroids are also frequently shown operating as space-based anti-aircraft defenses aboard the U.N. Spacy's battleships.**

*: It's highly probable that the destroids in question belong to the U.N. Army rather than the U.N. Spacy, as the official artbooks identify the khaki-clad officer in command of the ground-based defenses as belonging to that branch of the service.

**: Quite a few examples of the U.N. Spacy's standard battleship are shown with sizable destroid complements serving as their anti-aircraft defenses. The majority are Defender EX and Phalanx Kai units, though a handful of Tomahawk IIs are also seen. It's noteworthy that while the Giant Monster is never seen operating in space, its entry in Entertainment Bible 51 identifies its means of space-based locomotion.

Ironically the Valks grew larger after SW1 and the destroids grew smaller, if the Cheyenne II is any indicator of where destroid design logic was going.

A trend that may no longer be confined to the main continuity... for the first time we have possible size data for the destroids of Macross II, courtesy of Macross Chronicle. Chronicle's sizes put most of the destroids as being about 2m shorter than their SW1-era counterparts... with the notable exceptions of the Defender EX, which is about the same size, and the Giant Monster, which is about 3m taller than its predecessor.

[Retracting Head Ter Ter]

It's not exactly a problem limited to the Space War 1-era destroids, y'know. Unless they were equipped with plot armor because they were carrying a named character, Zentradi beam weapons tended to do pretty much the same thing to the lightly-armored Valkyries of the day as well. Even plot armor didn't save Hikaru's VF-1J from being torn to shreds during hand-to-hand combat, and the only other major instance of Valkyries going into hand-to-hand combat was faked for the benefit of Quamzin... whereas the Spartan at least comported itself reasonably well after the war as a police unit for the specific mission of controlling violent Zentradi.

My point is that it would serve the background consistency so much and not mess up the plot if they just bothered to have the cannon fodder destroids shown taking multiple hits from the smaller mecha weapons, damage to various locations before finally blowing up.

[Ryu Connor]

My point is that it would serve the background consistency so much and not mess up the plot if they just bothered to have the cannon fodder destroids shown taking multiple hits from the smaller mecha weapons, damage to various locations before finally blowing up.

I think that falls under the animation is expensive quandry.

The whole Destroid versus Valkyrie bit is a suspension of disbelief issue for me.

The amount of money involved in the construction and maintenance of Valkyries would be staggering and Kawamori hasn't even shied away from stating that and using it as the basis for why certain Valkyries supplanted others.

Mentioned in passing is the incredible cost for having pilots for the Valkyries. Three years in an Academy (two apparently if you're exceptional like Gamlin), wages, medical coverage, most likely a pension if you can hit twenty years, and presumably even your food and living are supported; be that eating in the mess hall, living in housing, or living off base and getting Basic Allowance for Housing (BAH). We have no clue if something like benefits for continued education exist as well. It's not an unreasonable assumption as a bennie for getting people to volunteer.

With costs like that it wouldn't surprise me that Spacy requires six to eight year contracts just to be a Valkyrie pilot. Piloting expensive Valkyries, some of which are denoted as notoriously difficult to handle for average pilots. To be honest I didn't appreciate how Kawamori treated the Spacy pilots early in Frontier, but that is a tangent.

Meanwhile the Spacy is competing against itself now with the introduction of contractors as frontline units. You can now make more money, have access to better equipment, and all you have to be willing to sacrifice is that pension, eductation benefits, and food and housing allocation; of which the extra money you make easily covers the latter two.

Now we have to consider Destroids. They're cheaper than Valkyries, they have to be, because the level of complexity isn't even anywhere close to the same. The Compendium denotes the original Cheyenne as being cheap to produce and even was diesel powered. Not that we really needed reinforcement of the cost point, reality made it pretty clear: M1A1: 6.2m USD, F22 Raptor: 142.6m USD.

The pilots for them would also be cheaper. You think you need three years to teach someone to essentially drive a tank? The Army MOS for a M1A1 tank crewman is 19K, AIT (training) time is fifteen weeks.

Now mix in that infantry and armored cavalry still fill specific niches that Valkyries cannot (and very likely their pilots are not sufficiently trained for) and suddenly we're in a weird place with dead cat girls.

The decline of Destroids in Macross is in my view purely because Kawamori likes Valkyries and fighter aircraft more and because Valkyries are in fact cooler. No underlying thought of his actions and how they are in effect a gaping hole in realism was considered.

Edited January 22, 2010 by Ryu Connor

[Seto Kaiba]

Mentioned in passing is the incredible cost for having pilots for the Valkyries. Three years in an Academy (two apparently if you're exceptional like Gamlin), wages, medical coverage, most likely a pension if you can hit twenty years, and presumably even your food and living are supported; be that eating in the mess hall, living in housing, or living off base and getting Basic Allowance for Housing (BAH). We have no clue if something like benefits for continued education exist as well. It's not an unreasonable assumption as a bennie for getting people to volunteer.

[...]

The pilots for them would also be cheaper. You think you need three years to teach someone to essentially drive a tank? The Army MOS for a M1A1 tank crewman is 19K, AIT (training) time is fifteen weeks.

While your line of reasoning here is almost sound, it seems highly unlikely that the training and upkeep for destroid operators isn't the same, or at least similar, from a cost perspective. The equipment itself might be more expensive (VFs are rumored to be ~20x the cost of destroids according to the artbooks), but there shouldn't be a terrible disparity in the cost to train them, since they're both living in the barracks, eating in the mess hall, and presumably draw similar benefits packages. Considering there's rather a large area of difference between operating a tracked vehicle (which doesn't really require much in the way of new skill sets to drive) and operating a ten meter tall walker, I wouldn't be so quick to make the assumption that destroid pilots are the sort of people who are churned out in vast numbers by a fifteen week training class.

Of course, we could also take the opposite route and completely demolish the assertion that Valkyrie pilot training is an expensive and time consuming process by pointing out that Hikaru enlisted in the U.N. Spacy in March '09, and cleared basic AND his VF pilot training by no later than 15 April '09. Additionally, Hikaru's teammates Max and Hayao were both recent enlistees themselves, and were in service no later than 10 October '09, which assuming they were civilians prior to the Macross's departure means they would barely have had time to complete basic and a fifteen week course after the city section was finished, let alone three years at the academy.

Piloting expensive Valkyries, some of which are denoted as notoriously difficult to handle for average pilots. To be honest I didn't appreciate how Kawamori treated the Spacy pilots early in Frontier, but that is a tangent.

With regard to average pilots having difficulty operating some models of VF... prototypes don't count, as they would only be flown by test pilots, who are generally at least above average if not exceptional, as was the case with Isamu Alva Dyson. These designs are the exception rather than the rule, and thus should not materially impact costs related to pilot training.

The decline of Destroids in Macross is in my view purely because Kawamori likes Valkyries and fighter aircraft more and because Valkyries are in fact cooler. No underlying thought of his actions and how they are in effect a gaping hole in realism was considered.

Destroids are background mecha with a very limited range of operational capabilities... and thus rather limited roles in the story. Macross II: Lovers Again provided enough leeway to actually fit some into the story in their common role as anti-aircraft defenses on the ground and in space. They simply weren't appropriate or necessary in Macross Plus, and Macross 7 was a less serious story, so using big shooty anti-aircraft platforms would've detracted a bit from the need for Basara to charge out there and warble his obnoxious music at them. They became appropriate again in Macross Zero, which was set during the development of the Space War 1 mecha, and stayed relevant enough in Macross Frontier out of necessity in a somewhat more serious war story with a far larger colony to defend.

Granted, Macross will always be about Valkyries and pilots because Kawamori has had a long love affair with aircraft design. Destroids are just a convenient means to an end as far as the story is concerned, so they appear and disappear as necessary.

[Ryu Connor]

but there shouldn't be a terrible disparity in the cost to train them, since they're both living in the barracks, eating in the mess hall, and presumably draw similar benefits packages.

That may not be true. I do not know of a cite source to prove it in Macross (though one may exist in one of the various books), but in the US Army you need only be an enlisted soldier to be a 19K. If Destroid teams need only be enlisted that has implications into their cost.

Enlisted have a very different payscale than an officer. Even the living arragements between officers and enlisted vary wildly in modern US forces. Senior officers in particular have it quite nice. The difference in payscale ultimately leads to difference in retirement (bigger pension for officers).

With exception to the original Macross, I know of no modern Spacy pilot who is not an officer. I use Spacy pilot there purposefully. I don't want to confuse the situation with contractors like Alto (a Warrant, which is still a form of an officer), Basara (a civilian), or Guld Bowman (a General Galaxy employee/private citizen).

Of course, we could also take the opposite route and completely demolish the assertion that Valkyrie pilot training is an expensive and time consuming process by pointing out that Hikaru enlisted in the U.N. Spacy in March '09, and cleared basic AND his VF pilot training by no later than 15 April '09.

This actually supports my point. We're both right on this one.

Yes, it definitely proves that three years is not necessary, but it also goes to illustrate that even the more complex Valkyrie does not need extensive training to operate. The fixed design Destroids shouldn't be any harder and stand to reason to be easier.

This is not the only instance we see of a crash course in piloting. Alto also underwent a training course with SMS that was definitely shorter than three years. Nonetheless, the academy for UN Spacy pilots is three years. A chunk of that three years is no doubt making them an officer. In order to provide a cite for this:

http://macross.anime.net/wiki/2041

At 15 years of age, Gamlin Kizaki enrolls into the Air Force School in the U.N. Spacy via special entry. (Macross 7)

http://macross.anime.net/wiki/2043

Gamlin Kizaki graduates Air Force School in two years (students normally take three years) and gets assigned as a VF-17 pilot on the Diamond Force. (Macross 7)

There is actually another amusing one in 2044.

http://macross.anime.net/wiki/2044

Aegis Focker graduates from military academy (after repeating one year) and is assigned as second lieutenant to the VFF stationed at New Anderson Base. (Macross VF-X2)

It took Focker four years due to some unspecified failing (misconduct or academic failure).

Of course AIT in the Army is in effect a crash course. Obviously our M1 tank teams continue to learn and refine their craft once they leave the school house and head to their gaining unit. That fifteen weeks is only the begining of their years long tour.

With regard to average pilots having difficulty operating some models of VF... prototypes don't count

Not just prototypes had issues though. Some cites:

http://macross.anime.net/wiki/VF-171

What the VF-171 aimed for wasn't merely high-performance, but the improvement of control which was the fault of the original craft, by adopting high-reliability, low-output engines and updating the control system avionics greatly reduces the pilot's burden so that it became an airframe that treated even average pilots easily.

Even the VF-17 was a difficult plane for average pilots to handle and the VF-171 mass production redsign of the craft aimed to help fix that.

http://macross.anime.net/wiki/VF-19

F and S-types replaced engines used in the YF-19 prototype with an engine which has stable output in addition to simplifying the airframe body. Because of these changes, it was completed with the comprehensive performance that allow average pilots to control it, exceeding the prototype unit.

We see it again. The F and S redesign of the Excalibur aimed to allow the average pilot to better control it.

My statement wasn't constrained to the YF-19. So long as the Compendium isn't citing tainted data, what we're seeing is Kawamori acknowledging that this is a difficult profession. The engineers are having to make compromises in order to support the lowest common denominator.

Granted, Macross will always be about Valkyries and pilots because Kawamori has had a long love affair with aircraft design. Destroids are just a convenient means to an end as far as the story is concerned, so they appear and disappear as necessary.

I hadn't really heard of TV Tropes until very recently but this particular one seemed to hit home.

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/RuleOfCool

Macross is definitely about the Valkryies and I enjoy it for what it is. Like I say, it just nags at my suspension of disbelief that he ignores the importance of those armored divisions for warfare when it applies.

[Seto Kaiba]

That may not be true. I do not know of a cite source to prove it in Macross (though one may exist in one of the various books), but in the US Army you need only be an enlisted soldier to be a 19K. If Destroid teams need only be enlisted that has implications into their cost.

At the risk of pointing out the obvious, the U.N. Spacy is not the U.S. Army, and destroids are not tanks. You can belabor this all you wish, but it won't make your assertion any less faulty.

Enlisted have a very different payscale than an officer. Even the living arragements between officers and enlisted vary wildly in modern US forces. Senior officers in particular have it quite nice. The difference in payscale ultimately leads to difference in retirement (bigger pension for officers).

Again, pointing out obvious facts you've tried to shift aside... not all Valkyrie pilots are officers. Prior to his promotion to 2nd Lt, Hikaru held the rank of Staff Sergeant. Hayao Kakizaki and Maximilian Jenius were also NCOs, prior to Kakizaki's death and Jenius's string of promotions. You're drawing another false conclusion about the training and status of Valkyrie pilots.

Yes, it definitely proves that three years is not necessary, but it also goes to illustrate that even the more complex Valkyrie does not need extensive training to operate. The fixed design Destroids shouldn't be any harder and stand to reason to be easier.

If only because it doesn't necessarily include piloting. One would imagine the most difficult part would be in common between the two programs... piloting a giant walker without falling on your ass.

This is not the only instance we see of a crash course in piloting. Alto also underwent a training course with SMS that was definitely shorter than three years. Nonetheless, the academy for UN Spacy pilots is three years. A chunk of that three years is no doubt making them an officer. In order to provide a cite for this:

What WAS true for Gamlin may not necessarily hold true for academies on all colony worlds, or in different parts of the timeline... one would imagine training would be somewhat abbreviated in the SW1 era and immediate aftermath, and it was reportedly reduced by the time the NUNS rolled around, due to the increased emphasis on unmanned combat units (AIF-7S/AIF-9V Ghost).

Not just prototypes had issues though. Some cites:

Joy... here we go with citations to prove a point that never had a factual basis to begin with. As I said in my previous post, the difficult-to-operate VFs are the EXCEPTION rather than the RULE. In fact, you even cited proof of what I was saying unintentionally. Yes, the VF-171's ease of control was a major factor in its adoption as the NUNS's main VF, its predecessor, the VF-17 Nightmare, was a special forces bird... not the sort of thing you hand over to an average pilot, and definitely not something you give to a rookie. My point still stands. Also, your assertion about the VF-19 disproves your own argument, as the only difficult-to-control member of that design family is the YF-19 prototype, and as I said, prototypes don't count on the grounds that they too would only be in the care of exceptionally skilled pilots. The mass production model was made substantially easier to control, thus it is not a difficult-to-operate VF.

Macross is definitely about the Valkryies and I enjoy it for what it is. Like I say, it just nags at my suspension of disbelief that he ignores the importance of those armored divisions for warfare when it applies.

Like I said, destroids are not just ground-pounders, they're background-pounders. They appear on an as-needed basis in the story. Having an overabundance of destroids trotting around would've been detrimental to the story of the Macross 7 TV series and Macross Plus OVA, so they were simply omitted. They do appear when it suits the story for them to be there. As ground units operating in space, the number of uses they can be feasibly put to are a bit on the limited side story-wise, a problem not helped in the least by the relatively small size of most U.N. Spacy ships in the main continuity. Destroids would simply be too bulky to be an effective AA solution on all but the largest of ships, as the ships wouldn't be able to carry enough to matter, and be large targets AND get in the way of the ship's weapons as well. The largest ships, like the battle sections, would benefit from destroid coverage because they're large enough that the destroids won't get in the way of anything and can carry enough of them to make a difference. This particular issue doesn't really matter in the parallel world continuity, since the smallest U.N. Spacy ships are pushing 500m and by any reasonable estimate the standard battleship's over 900m long, thus making them large enough for destroid air defenses to be practical.

Battles in Macross stories seldom take place on the ground for any length of time, so the one regime where the destroids would be most effective is almost never used... the notable exception being Macross II: Lovers Again.

Edited January 22, 2010 by Seto Kaiba

[VF5SS]

The moral of the story is don't try to diversify your mecha catalog lest you get whiny fans.

Also quoting TVtropes makes you look like a chump.

[Ryu Connor]

At the risk of pointing out the obvious, the U.N. Spacy is not the U.S. Army, and destroids are not tanks. You can belabor this all you wish, but it won't make your assertion any less faulty.

It's kinda of central when we're discussing my issue with how it impacts my suspension of disbelief. The absence of direct data is not proof one way or another. We may one day find out that all Destroid pilots are in fact enlisted. We may find out they are all officers.

We do not know, therefore I choose to form an opinion based upon the real world. I could of course choose to have no opinion on the matter, but there wouldn't be much to discuss on these forums.

Being that we have no data one way or another, I find the statement that my opinion is faulty strange. I want this to be a fun conversation even if we disagree at the end.

So when you say faulty, what do you mean? Are you recoiling in horror that in absence of direct data that I'd use the real world as a reference? I didn't figure it was that far a leap, Macross has US Military stuff in it already.

Were you saying they are probably officers and have similar cost? I mean either way at this point we're at impasse, I don't really expect us to sway one direction or another, but I'm interested in your view.

Again, pointing out obvious facts you've tried to shift aside... not all Valkyrie pilots are officers. Prior to his promotion to 2nd Lt, Hikaru held the rank of Staff Sergeant. Hayao Kakizaki and Maximilian Jenius were also NCOs, prior to Kakizaki's death and Jenius's string of promotions. You're drawing another false conclusion about the training and status of Valkyrie pilots.

What WAS true for Gamlin may not necessarily hold true for academies on all colony worlds, or in different parts of the timeline... one would imagine training would be somewhat abbreviated in the SW1 era and immediate aftermath, and it was reportedly reduced by the time the NUNS rolled around, due to the increased emphasis on unmanned combat units (AIF-7S/AIF-9V Ghost).

You detail that timeline is an issue, definitely. The original Macross illustrates that. I presumed that a given and that my discussion didn't impede that. If my words appear to try and deny that reality, then I assume I poorly phrased.

Macross, as you note, was abbreviated and we haven't seen that again since. I see no reason to shift it aside or try to hide it, it's the reality of the situation (they needed bodies fast) and I don't see where it makes my point any weaker. An exception doesn't make the rule (an item you note with the difficulty of Valkyries later in the conversation).

We've seen both Gamlin and Focker (VF-X2) spend time in the academy.

In the fairness of good conversation I'll even concede that Isamu's profile is incomplete, lacking discussion of an academy, but he was an officer and of course a lack of detail to explain his situation doesn't really sway things one way or another.

I even went and dug as far back as Roy and Misa. Roy has no data and Misa did go to the academy for two years.

Focker (VF-X2) was assigned to New Anderson, I'm guessing that's on Earth, but I don't see a note for its' location. Regardless he shows a pattern similiar to Gamlin who was on a colony fleet.

So that gives us two pilots who did, one pilot that lacks data, three pilots who did not under the wartime crunch of SWI, and one who served during the unification wars that lacks data. In my view the wartime crunch three are clearly an exception of the difficult times. I find Misa's two year stint interesting as well.

I know where my bias falls in the weighing of that, but to each their own.

As for different rules on different worlds? Perhaps, but the Spacy would most likely want to maintain standards for their soldiers regardless of their location. That has important implications if a request for help is made; as is suggested by the Frontier fleet during their more dire days.

If Spacy soldiers from different worlds cannot coordinate together then they aren't an effective fighting force.

We don't really have any evidence of that one way or another. So I'm left to form an opinion based upon how the US Military works for the answer to that until something canon appears.

Joy... here we go with citations to prove a point that never had a factual basis to begin with. As I said in my previous post, the difficult-to-operate VFs are the EXCEPTION rather than the RULE. In fact, you even cited proof of what I was saying unintentionally. Yes, the VF-171's ease of control was a major factor in its adoption as the NUNS's main VF, its predecessor, the VF-17 Nightmare, was a special forces bird... not the sort of thing you hand over to an average pilot, and definitely not something you give to a rookie. My point still stands. Also, your assertion about the VF-19 disproves your own argument, as the only difficult-to-control member of that design family is the YF-19 prototype, and as I said, prototypes don't count on the grounds that they too would only be in the care of exceptionally skilled pilots. The mass production model was made substantially easier to control, thus it is not a difficult-to-operate VF.

If the VF-17 was a difficult to control craft, then it not unreasonable to assume that others that came before it and after it might have the same issue.

We do not know, we only have two instances of the difficulty of piloting mentioned directly.

The original VF-17 article doesn't even mention the difficulty. It was an aspect that suddenly appeared with the introduction of the VF-171. So we either have a glossing over originally or a sudden retconning in depending on your perspective. If it really is a retcon in, then I have to wonder if Kawamori is trying to illustrate a point or if it was merely an execuse to streamling the VF-17.

This is another situation where I don't see where either of us can prove it anymore than disprove it. Perhaps the 17 and the 19 do represent the exception and the rest of the models are as easy to handle as a tricycle.

More realistically I presume that some models catered well to average pilots and others didn't. I also presume that as Macross progressed closer toward the AVF era and got into Valkyries that were limited in their full potential by the body of their pilots (an item the Messiah denotes) that mastery of them became alot harder and required considerably more flight time for the average pilot.

The BDI/BCS system of the YF-21 and the development of the Ghost X-9 I feel actually support this. The former toward expanding the capability of the pilot with these complex craft and the latter bypassing the need for a human to master the process and being much cheaper by not needing to recruit the soldier at all.

We could even argue that the 21 didn't necessitate BDI/BCS directly, but that it was a solution that evolved from older craft already not reaching the potential. A gap that would have only been made worse by the AVFs of Project Supernova; actually I suppose it was made worse given the 19 test pilot issues. We have no specific proof for that one way or another and are left to our opinions.

I understand your point about the YF-19, but in the way I interpet the text that tradeoff arguably weakened the potential of the Excalibur.

The cited point when it says it exceeded the prototype only refers to the average pilot being able to handle it. The tradeoff for engenering it that was at the cost of some amount of that "astounding maneuverability performance" of the prototype.

I mention that to say what I apparently failed to convey accurately initially. If the Valkyries has to get weaker in order to accomodate the average pilot (lowest common denominator as I phrased it originally) then it estabilishes a compromise that for me creates questions.

The first of course being the breadth of context of control. That the average pilot can keep it moving doesn't preclude that it still wasn't a bitch to fly.

Was this the first time a prototype had to go into production with a tradeoff? Does this tie back into solutions like BDI/BCS and the X-9? Was it a large portion of the Valkyries having to be adjusted downward that created the impetus to find a new direction?

Or Was it only the 19 and 17 that had to get whacked to afford the lowest common denominator? I suspect the 17 and the 19 represent a more systemic problem, but obviously that's open for debate and I understand your disagreeance.

Like I said, destroids are not just ground-pounders, they're background-pounders. They appear on an as-needed basis in the story. Having an overabundance of destroids trotting around would've been detrimental to the story of the Macross 7 TV series and Macross Plus OVA, so they were simply omitted. They do appear when it suits the story for them to be there. As ground units operating in space, the number of uses they can be feasibly put to are a bit on the limited side story-wise, a problem not helped in the least by the relatively small size of most U.N. Spacy ships in the main continuity. Destroids would simply be too bulky to be an effective AA solution on all but the largest of ships, as the ships wouldn't be able to carry enough to matter, and be large targets AND get in the way of the ship's weapons as well. The largest ships, like the battle sections, would benefit from destroid coverage because they're large enough that the destroids won't get in the way of anything and can carry enough of them to make a difference. This particular issue doesn't really matter in the parallel world continuity, since the smallest U.N. Spacy ships are pushing 500m and by any reasonable estimate the standard battleship's over 900m long, thus making them large enough for destroid air defenses to be practical.

Battles in Macross stories seldom take place on the ground for any length of time, so the one regime where the destroids would be most effective is almost never used... the notable exception being Macross II: Lovers Again.

We're pretty much in sync here.

Just some clarifications of my views. I do not believe they should be everywhere. If it seemed like my writing implied that, that was in error.

I feel they fit well in the original Macross. I can understand why they were missing from 2012 and Plus.

I do find it odd that they were missing from 7. I feel Frontier did a decent job with their Destroids and where they were placed and feel that 7 could have had a least a little of that, even if they were merely inside of City 7 for defense.

Much like you, I too am a big fan of Macross II and felt they were well placed there as well.

My only nitpick for Frontier was that they only had the Cheyenne, but whatever. That it had infantry and armor for the first time in ages was astounding to me. Though I guess we could argue they suffered from not having enough of it when they ended up with a bug problem.

Sorry, if I missed something. Big post is big.

[sketchley]

We do not know, therefore I choose to form an opinion based upon the real world. I could of course choose to have no opinion on the matter, but there wouldn't be much to discuss on these forums.

But why the US military? Macross is a Japanese production, so wouldn't the Self-Defence Forces make a better real-world example?

I feel they fit well in the original Macross. I can understand why they were missing from 2012 and Plus.

I do find it odd that they were missing from 7. I feel Frontier did a decent job with their Destroids and where they were placed and feel that 7 could have had a least a little of that, even if they were merely inside of City 7 for defense.

Much like you, I too am a big fan of Macross II and felt they were well placed there as well.

My only nitpick for Frontier was that they only had the Cheyenne, but whatever. That it had infantry and armor for the first time in ages was astounding to me.

Seto's done a good job of summing up why they are missing from certain Macross productions, and appear in others.

Nevertheless, Macross Chronicle has confirmed that Destroid usage has continued in the greater Macross universe. But that usage is limited to multi-purpose destroids continuing to be developed from the 03 series (Cheyenne, Cheyenne II).