Jump to content

Destroids...


Cyclone Trooper
 Share

Recommended Posts

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.
post-9033-1264213924_thumb.jpg

I take it that Isamu is one of those who are scouted by UN Spacy. The concept is seen in Macross 7 Trash with T-Crush players prize for the tournament was being a VF pilot.

The concept is again seen in Macross Frontier with Alto as Cathy tried to blackmail him into joining. But Ozma pulled the rug under her that time.

As for Isamu its either he gets sent to a warzone or anywhere he goes becomes a warzone... Yeah the guy has trouble wrtten all over him that is why nobody wanted him under their command.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

I'm kind of astonished that, blunt as I am about most things, that you need me to reiterate it... but okay, I'm game. My point here is that while you are entitled to your opinion and all that, you're basing your objections (or rather, grievances) on a series of faulty assumptions... namely, comparing destroid training and its inherent costs to much lower-tech real world equipment and the training necessary to use it, and the particularly odd choice of the US Army as a model, when Macross's creators are Japanese, and thus modeled some elements of the U.N. Spacy on the SDF (most noticably, rank insignia in the DYRL scheme).

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

Yes, but that doesn't necessarily mean that all VF pilots (or destroid pilots for that matter) attend a military academy or even anything beyond their basic training. That all VF pilots must be officers who graduated from a military academy is demonstrably faulty, as we have the previously-offered evidence that not all pilots are officers, and that the training to operate a VF in combat definitely does not require years of study.

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.

Well, you have to consider things like the current military situation (quite a few Macross pilots have been trained or had their training abbreviated during a time of war, incl. Hikaru Ichijyo, Maximilian Jenius, Hayao Kakizaki, Komilia Maria Jenius (M2036), Lott Sheen, Hayato Kiryu, etc. etc. etc.) and other concerns like changes in technology. Ostensibly, one of the primary motivations for equipping EX-Gear is to make the fighters easier for pilots to control and facilitate training cutbacks without significantly impairing their performance in the field. One does have to wonder how the EX-Gear might improve the destroids of the era too... since they don't have to worry about concerns like transforming I'd imagine that weak variant of the BCS might drastically improve their performance and accuracy... but that's just my particular hypothesis.

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.

Okay, let's not ASSUME anything. Assumptions invariably come back to bite the one doing the assuming in the arse. We have a post-facto statement that the VF-17 was somewhat difficult to control compared to the VF-171. That is pretty much the only VF actually singled out as abnormally difficult to operate in any way, barring prototypes which would not be mass produced. Whether the VF-17 is ACTUALLY difficult to control or just more difficult than the VF-171 is kind of ambiguous.

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.

'kay... let's go back and re-read that citation, the VF-19 isn't singled out like the VF-17 is. It's mentioned that the YF-19 was difficult, but that usability was improved in the mass-production model, so that leaves our one and only problem child being the VF-17, a special forces bird that no rookie has any business being in unless they're hot poo already.

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.

It would've been nice for Macross Frontier to use something newer than the Cheyenne, but it was only going to be a background mecha anyway, and they already had a 3D model for it... so waste not, want not.

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

Thank you, I do try... ^_^

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).

Something that will always perplex me... though not quite as much as EB51 sparing a thought for how the Giant Monster (or as Chronicle mistakenly calls it, the Monster II) moves on the deck of a carrier, but it never actually appears on one (that I've been able to discern). I gotta admit, I find the Defender EX to be possibly the single most frightening AA unit the U.N. Spacy's ever produced... if only because it's an anti-aircraft unit armed with four anti-battleship railguns.

Edited by Seto Kaiba
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We also have to consider that UN Spacy/NUNS is just a branch of the military. For all we know the UN Army primarily has the monopoly on the destroids.

It certainly doesn't help that there're one or two extra branches of the service that appear to be redundant or otherwise somewhat unclear in their particular role... the one that leaps to mind being the U.N. Spacy Air Force, which has no clear reason for existing. After all, we already have both a U.N. Spacy and U.N. Air Force, to say nothing of the U.N. Army, the U.N. Navy, the U.N. Marines, and the U.N. Spacy Marines.

So far, at least four branches of the service could easily offer a reasonable justification for the inclusion of destroid units among their ranks. Obviously, the U.N. Spacy could justify their use as mobile air defense platforms on their larger ships and for the odd ARMD/Daedalus/Macross Attack, which may or may not fall be the jurisdiction of the U.N. Spacy Marines. Likewise, both the U.N. Army and U.N. Marines could make a case for the inclusion of destroid armored units for ground combat (their intended purpose, after all) and as ad-hoc anti-aircraft emplacements for the defense of planetside bases, naval vessels, and cities in the event that things go seriously pear-shaped and their opponents (Zentradi, Mardook, etc.) make it past the fleet and the orbital defenses (as they did in Macross II).

As to who actually owns the destroids... in the main continuity the finger seems to be pointed primarily at the U.N. Spacy, given that even the early ADR-03 Cheyennes used aboard the Asuka II bore the legend "U.N. SPACY" on their gun arms, and all subsequent models in Super Dimension Fortress Macross are listed as operating under the U.N. Spacy as well. Other branches might have their own, but the ones we've seen so far belong to the Spacy. In the parallel world continuity's Macross II: Lovers Again OVA, we're offered possible evidence of more than one branch of the service using destroids at one time... with the battleship-based destroids likely serving under the auspices of the U.N. Spacy and the ground-based units under the command of a U.N. Army officer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

namely, comparing destroid training and its inherent costs to much lower-tech real world equipment and the training necessary to use it, and the particularly odd choice of the US Army as a model, when Macross's creators are Japanese, and thus modeled some elements of the U.N. Spacy on the SDF (most noticably, rank insignia in the DYRL scheme).

That part doesn't really change much for me. The JSDF and US Forces aren't that radically different. In fact they moan about many of the same things. Retention issues, losing exeperience to better paying civilian jobs (contractors), complaints about their recruiting practices, and even a bias against those that volunteer. Issues that all get touched on at one point or another in Frontier.

Even the Academy bit is both a US and JSDF thing. The National Defense Academy in Japan is a four year course; Japan's West Point. Alternatively a four year univeristy degree can get you into OCS in the SDF, same as in the US. So officers in the Spacy that didn't attend the academy or graduate from Uni deviate from both the JSDF and US. Along the same line only officers are pilots in the JSDF and US.

The JGSDF is also weird in a sense in that they are not allowed to call themselves an army. The anti-militarization beliefs of Japan put them in strange binds (live training excercises is another sore point). Both points at which Spacy distances itself and looks more US like.

You can use either to fill holes in operational structure and end up with something that looks very similiar. The bureaucracy of the mess might look different, but government bureaucracy are generally uniform in one thing: retardation.

As for the training. I'm a firm believer in specialization. The destroids have a very fixed function and role as part of an armored calvary. Supporting infantry/valkyries with air and ground, taking territory, and participating in police actions are all a basic part of that.

Valkyries must learn atmospheric combat, space combat, and ground combat. The Valkyrie pilot in addition to understanding his role and his modes and his weapons in atmosphere and space, must also presumably learn the same thing as the Destroid. Supporting infantry on the ground, assist in taking territory, and even support police actions.

You're asking them to be both Destroid pilot and a Valkyrie pilot and in that scenario I see an obvious disparity in training time, training costs, and who is gonna be more skilled at it. You have to wonder how well some Spacy pilots do at shifting gear on that too. Say a posting of six years doing space combat with a Galaxy Patrol and then ending up stationed at some hot spot of a planet with governmental stability issues and you attempting to contain violence through police actions.

one of the primary motivations for equipping EX-Gear is to make the fighters easier for pilots to control and facilitate training cutbacks without significantly impairing their performance in the field. One does have to wonder how the EX-Gear might improve the destroids of the era too... since they don't have to worry about concerns like transforming I'd imagine that weak variant of the BCS might drastically improve their performance and accuracy... but that's just my particular hypothesis.

The only catch I see in that is if the Destroid design doesn't really have anymore fidelity to give. If traditional operation is within a few % of max performance, then it's more money for little gain.

Okay, let's not ASSUME anything. Assumptions invariably come back to bite the one doing the assuming in the arse.

In absence of data all that is left is a best guess. We're working at comprehension of translated data without the context and input of its' creator. You're gonna end up staked out in the wild at some point.

'kay... let's go back and re-read that citation, the VF-19 isn't singled out like the VF-17 is. It's mentioned that the YF-19 was difficult, but that usability was improved in the mass-production model, so that leaves our one and only problem child being the VF-17, a special forces bird that no rookie has any business being in unless they're hot poo already.

Gamlin seemed like pretty fresh meat at the start of Mac 7, though I suppose graduating a year early showed us he was supposed to be on the upper end of that skill curve.

The whole issue of testing these prototypes just has a weird vibe of inflation and data bias to it all. If you put absolutely amazing pilots who can push the envelope into a Valkyrie that the average pilot can't handle and then ultimately award it the win, seems to me you've sort of missed the bullseye. For that matter if you put amazing test pilots in it and see only the upper end of its' performance, even if the average pilot can fly it, you've still got tainted data.

Average is always substantially larger pool than exceptional.

Something that will always perplex me... though not quite as much as EB51 sparing a thought for how the Giant Monster (or as Chronicle mistakenly calls it, the Monster II) moves on the deck of a carrier, but it never actually appears on one (that I've been able to discern). I gotta admit, I find the Defender EX to be possibly the single most frightening AA unit the U.N. Spacy's ever produced... if only because it's an anti-aircraft unit armed with four anti-battleship railguns.

With mobility largely sacrificed and the reality that you'll never have enough armor, why settle for anything less than total overkill with your weaponry?

Since we're close to heading round and round (if not already there). I'm agreeing to agree to disagree on many of the contentious points, but I appreciate the alternate point of view/debate.

Edited by Ryu Connor
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for the training. I'm a firm believer in specialization. The destroids have a very fixed function and role as part of an armored calvary. Supporting infantry/valkyries with air and ground, taking territory, and participating in police actions are all a basic part of that.

Here's the problem... belief. Rather than going by the available evidence which suggests that learning to operate a Valkyrie isn't necessarily all that difficult or time-consuming (as we see in SDF Macross), you're projecting your beliefs based on something that is at best a poor analogue for the technology being used onto the situation. Aside from flight training, both destroid and Valkyrie pilots are going to have to learn ground combat, the difference being that a destroid operator might have to learn to operate more than one type of destroid during basic, whereas a Valkyrie pilot will, in most cases, only have to learn one VF at a time. As far as the actual ground combat training goes, it can't honestly be THAT different, since Hikaru displayed reasonable aptitude at operating a MBR-07-Mk.II Spartan on the fly.

The only catch I see in that is if the Destroid design doesn't really have anymore fidelity to give. If traditional operation is within a few % of max performance, then it's more money for little gain.

Unless that expenditure translates into increased survivability, which according to Chronicle was one of the main reasons for implementing the EX-Gear on Valkyries.

In absence of data all that is left is a best guess. We're working at comprehension of translated data without the context and input of its' creator. You're gonna end up staked out in the wild at some point.

There's a difference between logical inference based on in-universe evidence and trying to apply something only tangentially related from the real world.

Gamlin seemed like pretty fresh meat at the start of Mac 7, though I suppose graduating a year early showed us he was supposed to be on the upper end of that skill curve.

Pretty much what I was getting at... Gamlin might've been a bit green as of 2045, but he was good enough to be assigned to a special operations unit right after graduation. That's not average by any means.

The whole issue of testing these prototypes just has a weird vibe of inflation and data bias to it all. If you put absolutely amazing pilots who can push the envelope into a Valkyrie that the average pilot can't handle and then ultimately award it the win, seems to me you've sort of missed the bullseye. For that matter if you put amazing test pilots in it and see only the upper end of its' performance, even if the average pilot can fly it, you've still got tainted data.

You'd be right if they were evaluating the production model. But if you're examining a new design and implementations of new technology, you're going to want to push that new design to its limits. Once you've established whether the new technologies work or not, and pushed the design to its limits to find out what it's capable of in actual testing, then you can worry about tuning it towards the needs of an average pilot (or in the case of the VF-22, an above-average pilot for a special operations bird) and be fairly confident that the average pilot won't be able to fly the damn thing to pieces. Among other things, one of the goals of Project Super Nova was to evaluate several new technologies, including the Brainwave Control System, so an above average pilot who'd be able to handle not just flying the damn thing, but managing data collection and keeping it airborne as long as possible if things start to go awry would be in order.

With mobility largely sacrificed and the reality that you'll never have enough armor, why settle for anything less than total overkill with your weaponry?

Either you're referring to the Giant Monster (in which case you're somewhat inaccurate) or you've never actually done any research into the destroids I'm talking about. Two of the key design features in Macross II's destroids that're mentioned repeatedly are the greater range of motion in the joints and rollers installed in the feet to make the mecha faster. Mobility was improved in the second generation, not sacrificed. (At least for the majority, we can't speak for the Giant Monster because the damn thing is never actually seen moving, and the official artbooks only spare thought for HOW it gets around, not how quickly).

All the same, there's total overkill and then there's that... though I suppose it must be some comfort to know you can annihilate even the most heavily armored enemy combat mecha in a single shot when it comes down to it and potentially give a low-flying battleship a hard time if you need to. Stick a Phalanx Kai next to that Defender EX and you're looking at more than 3x the firepower of a SAP-equipped VF-2SS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The JGSDF is also weird in a sense in that they are not allowed to call themselves an army. The anti-militarization beliefs of Japan put them in strange binds (live training excercises is another sore point).

Erm, you'll need to research your Japanese history, as well, sir.

A) It's part of the constitution (article 9)

B) the US essentially forced the constitution on the Japanese (therefore, the legal aspects of the "anti-militarization beliefs" are fundementally alien)

C) the SDF is a transformed and expanded National Police Reserve (the creation of which, and subsequent transformation and expansion being prompted by the US)

Nevertheless, Macross is made in Japan, and it makes sense that agencies in Macross are based on those most familiar (Japanese agencies). It also looks like the latest incarnation of the UN Government in MF is even more like Japan, than preceeding incarnations (sans DYRL, as that's a movie within a movie).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as the actual ground combat training goes, it can't honestly be THAT different, since Hikaru displayed reasonable aptitude at operating a MBR-07-Mk.II Spartan on the fly.

Ground combat training speaks to more than just piloting. There of course is the tactical and squad interaction aspects as well. Macross just has a bad habit of showing everything as operation roll face.

It was never about hard with regard to the destroid, my point all along is that they are easy. Easy/cheap to build, easy/cheap to train, easy/cheap enlisted soldiers, and easy/cheap maintenance.

Hikaru used one dead easy. Quamzin steals a monster and three of his men use it dead easy. VF-X and VF-X2 show rebel factions, with poor and old gear, and they use cheap and easy destroids. Civilian destroids for construction, probably cheap and easy too.

Are we sure we're in disagreeance on this? I almost feel like we got some other debate mixed into this one.

Either you're referring to the Giant Monster (in which case you're somewhat inaccurate) or you've never actually done any research into the destroids I'm talking about.

Not alot of good sources handy. TIAS #5 doesn't give any of them much love (just a tiny section of p. 97) and trusting the Macross II RPG would be faulty. The Compendium lacks links and your website is down. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm aware of what you stated and my statement was in no way meant to imply or contradict anything you stated. You read too much into it.

I read what was written: an implication and assumption of something that's not historically accurate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nevertheless, Macross is made in Japan, and it makes sense that agencies in Macross are based on those most familiar (Japanese agencies). It also looks like the latest incarnation of the UN Government in MF is even more like Japan, than preceeding incarnations (sans DYRL, as that's a movie within a movie)

Precisely right. It even manifests in the little details like the rank insignia which first appeared in Macross: Do You Remember Love? and were also used in Macross II: Lovers Again. Like the ranks of the Japanese Air Self Defense Force (and the old Imperial Japanese Army, and the police, etc.) the rank insignia worn by the U.N. Forces follow the same progression of threes, and in Macross II even share the same general coloration pattern (switching from red to gold for General officers).

It was never about hard with regard to the destroid, my point all along is that they are easy. Easy/cheap to build, easy/cheap to train, easy/cheap enlisted soldiers, and easy/cheap maintenance. Hikaru used one dead easy. Quamzin steals a monster and three of his men use it dead easy. VF-X and VF-X2 show rebel factions, with poor and old gear, and they use cheap and easy destroids. Civilian destroids for construction, probably cheap and easy too.

Okay, one of those four assertions can be backed up, the other three are opinion stated as fact. Yes, the "standard destroid" (whichever model that is) is rumored to be approximately 1/20th the cost of the VF-1. Whether or not it's true is another matter entirely, though logically the non-transforming destroid designs should be easier to build and possibly to maintain (barring potentially high-wear equipment like particle beam cannons). Whether they are easy to train on, employ enlisted soldiers, and are actually easy to maintain is unknown, and thus should not be entered as supporting evidence for any kind of assertion.

With regard to the ease of operation where destroids are concerned, what makes you assume Valkyries are any exception? I could point to a handful of pilots who were simply dropped into the cockpit with little or no time for training and produce results ranging from muddling along acceptably to shaming the best aces of the era. Such examples on the low end include Hikaru Ichijo and Shin Kudo, both of whom did reasonably well in their first outing in a VF despite minimal (or absent) training, and Alto Saotome, whose pilot training and EX-Gear experience let him save the girl and get away with his life and his dignity. On the "embarrassing our aces" front we have Milia Fallyna Jenius, who would only have had a week or two to familiarize herself with the real McCoy before going into battle, and Misty Klaus, who on her very first outing and with no prior preparation manages to shame the best pilots of the Prometheus taskforce by singlehandedly defending the Prometheus II from a sustained Zentradi attack.

Not alot of good sources handy. TIAS #5 doesn't give any of them much love (just a tiny section of p. 97) and trusting the Macross II RPG would be faulty. The Compendium lacks links and your website is down. ;)

Touche... though even the Compendium offers at least those few details about mobility and increased range of motion from EB51 thanks to the efforts of Azrael. Try searching.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
With regard to the ease of operation where destroids are concerned, what makes you assume Valkyries are any exception? I could point to a handful of pilots who were simply dropped into the cockpit with little or no time for training and produce results ranging from muddling along acceptably to shaming the best aces of the era. Such examples on the low end include Hikaru Ichijo and Shin Kudo, both of whom did reasonably well in their first outing in a VF despite minimal (or absent) training, and Alto Saotome, whose pilot training and EX-Gear experience let him save the girl and get away with his life and his dignity. On the "embarrassing our aces" front we have Milia Fallyna Jenius, who would only have had a week or two to familiarize herself with the real McCoy before going into battle, and Misty Klaus, who on her very first outing and with no prior preparation manages to shame the best pilots of the Prometheus taskforce by singlehandedly defending the Prometheus II from a sustained Zentradi attack.

Both Hikaru and Shin were Trained pilots Shin was a Naval Aviator who flue F-14 off a Aircraft carrier which is one of the most demanding jobs in the military Carrier landing is more stressfully than Combat from what I have read about Carrier aviation He was not novice.

Non of the People who have taken control of a Variable Fighters ever killed another machine during their first foray, and did not become a Savant pilot in two seconds like Kira Yamato.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With regard to the ease of operation where destroids are concerned, what makes you assume Valkyries are any exception? I could point to a handful of pilots who were simply dropped into the cockpit with little or no time for training and produce results ranging from muddling along acceptably to shaming the best aces of the era. Such examples on the low end include Hikaru Ichijo and Shin Kudo, both of whom did reasonably well in their first outing in a VF despite minimal (or absent) training,

Hikaru didn't. Not in battroid mode, anyhow.

He transformed it from a plane, which he had extensive professional experience with, to a robot, which he had no experience with, crashed through a city block(I'll give this one to the Zentradi that shot him down), and proceeded to smash buildings on either side of the street, requiring assistance from the citizens around him to extract his vehicle from the building.

Roy Focker subsequently tells him to transform to GERWALK mode because it controls much more like a regular fighter plane.

In fighter mode, it's a plane. Hikaru had extensive training and real-world experience at flying those.

In GERWALK it controls more or less like a plane. We'll have to take Focker's word for that.

In battroid mode... an untrained Variable Fighter pilot with extensive airplane experience is a danger to himself and those around him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would've been nice for Macross Frontier to use something newer than the Cheyenne, but it was only going to be a background mecha anyway, and they already had a 3D model for it... so waste not, want not.

Frontier has the Cheyenne II, not the Cheyenne.

I would imagine the Cheyenne II is significantly newer and improved than the original Cheyenne and likely performs much better.

Don't know why people are so down on the Cheyenne II. While it obviously shares a common design heritage with the original, it's not the same mecha.

Graham

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Non of the People who have taken control of a Variable Fighters ever killed another machine during their first foray, and did not become a Savant pilot in two seconds like Kira Yamato.

Not entirely true... there is the case of Misty Klaus, one of the principal characters in Macross: Eternal Love Song, a canon game in the parallel world continuity. In her very first outing in a VF (one she stole, mind), with no prior training or experience operating a VF, managed to not only defend the carrier Prometheus II from a sustained Zentradi attack nearly singlehandedly, sent them packing before the carrier's own fighter squadrons had a chance to make it back. She didn't exactly become an invincible savant pilot.

Insofar as the difficulty of training and how helpful prior experience operating an aircraft is/was, we have to remember that for every Hikaru Ichijo or Shin Kudo, there's a Misty Klaus or a Milia Jenius... someone who, despite having almost certainly never set foot in the cockpit of a plane before, picks up the basics of a VF's operation in an extremely short span of time and is able to operate one in combat not long after and not embarrass themselves too badly. (Other such likely individuals include Maximilian Jenius, Hayao Kakizaki, Sheryl Nome, poss. Mylene Jenius)

In battroid mode... an untrained Variable Fighter pilot with extensive airplane experience is a danger to himself and those around him.

As I illustrated above, not entirely true...

Don't know why people are so down on the Cheyenne II. While it obviously shares a common design heritage with the original, it's not the same mecha.

Allegations of animator laziness aside, the Cheyenne II is a technologically updated version of the ADR-03-Mk.III Cheyenne from before Space War 1. Rather than have something that looked like a technological step forward from the Space War 1 destroids, we got the giant robot equivalent of someone renovating an old M4 Sherman with modern tech and expecting it to perform just as well as an M1 Abrams. It just doesn't make much sense from a design standpoint... like the military going back to an old P-51 and saying "this was good poo, let's strap a jet engine and some laser-guided munitions on this puppy and put it back into service!".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not entirely true... there is the case of Misty Klaus, one of the principal characters in Macross: Eternal Love Song, a canon game in the parallel world continuity.

that doesn't count at all.

that's like talking about how Rookie One is a better pilot than Luke Skywalker. No one cares.

It just doesn't make much sense from a design standpoint... like the military going back to an old P-51 and saying "this was good poo, let's strap a jet engine and some laser-guided munitions on this puppy and put it back into service!".

More like various attempts by Russian weapons manufacturers to extend the lifespan of their products with upgrade kits and new weapons. Or even licensing their designs to foreign manufacturers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

that's like talking about how Rookie One is a better pilot than Luke Skywalker. No one cares.

So, let me get this straight... instead of contributing to the discussion in any meaningful way, you're going to make snide, nonsensical remarks because you find something objectionable about my backing up my points with examples? I'm at a loss for words... <_<

The point that I'm laboriously trying to get to through these examples is that the disparity in difficulty between destroid combat training and battroid combat training can't be THAT large, since there are not only several examples in the original Macross series where training for certain Valkyrie pilots can't have lasted more than a few weeks*, and green recruits who likely have never even flown before are combat-ready in a matter of months**, but also a handful of examples where pilots with NO training are dropped into the cockpit and still get around ok.*** Yes, there are cases where new recruits who get processed through some of the various military academies have training that lasts years, but that period likely includes a substantially broader curriculum than just "here's how to pilot this giant robot".

* In SDF Macross, the absolute maximum duration Hikaru's training could have been is approximately 45 days, assuming "Transformation" takes place on March 1, and that he had only been on duty for a day or so before "Daedalus Attack". That 45 day period includes not only his Valkyrie pilot training, but the basic training seen in the montage as well. This is less than half the 15 weeks normally allocated in modern militaries for training on a tank.

** Assuming Milia didn't start training for a place in the U.N. Spacy until after the wedding, her pilot training cannot have lasted more than 13 days prior to her entering combat in "Love Drifts Away".

*** Your mileage may vary... Hikaru stumbling around the city, Misty Klaus defeating hordes of Zentradi solo, etc.

The disparity can't possibly be THAT big, so presumably destroid training ought to be rather easy by comparison (only one mode to worry about), and clearly VF training isn't the sort of thing you need years and OCS to get to grips with as was previously suggested.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Allegations of animator laziness aside, the Cheyenne II is a technologically updated version of the ADR-03-Mk.III Cheyenne from before Space War 1. Rather than have something that looked like a technological step forward from the Space War 1 destroids, we got the giant robot equivalent of someone renovating an old M4 Sherman with modern tech and expecting it to perform just as well as an M1 Abrams. It just doesn't make much sense from a design standpoint... like the military going back to an old P-51 and saying "this was good poo, let's strap a jet engine and some laser-guided munitions on this puppy and put it back into service!".

That's one way of looking at it.

The way I see it is that after Space War I, the Destroids Tomahawk, Phalanx and Spartan were found to be extremely lacking in the necessary offensive and defensive capabilities, not to mention mobility to combat Zentran/Meltran mecha on a 1/1 basis, which could explain why we have not seen any futher development of those models (non-canon Macross II not withstanding). The Destroid monster while more than adequate in offensive capabilty was found lacking in mobility, hence the developemont of the more mobile and self-transporting Konig Monster.

Whereas perhaps the Cheyenne was found to be more capable and suitable for further development than the original Destroids, hence the Cheyenne II in Macross Frontier. Whereas the original Tomahawk , Phalanx and Spartan are seen relegated to construction mecha duties and then to nothing more than amusement park attractions by 2045 in Macross 7.

While the Cheyenne II is superficially similar to the original Cheyenne, it seems to offer enhanced capabilites over the original SDFM Destoids and the original Macross Zero Cheyenne. Note the twin heavy duty beam weapons, two heavy-caliber gunpod class gattling type guns, and larger twin missile launchers, not to mention the obvious improved mobility over the SDFM class destroids offered by the wheeled feet.

As mentioned, while superficially similar in outward apearance, the Cheyenne II could likely have far improved armor weapons, sensors, mobility etc than the original SDFM Destroids or the first mark Cheyenne from Macross Zero.

It could be said that an M4 Sherman and MI Abrams are superficially similar. Both are tanks, have tracks, a turret and a main gun, but are worlds apart in terms of capability.

Just a counterpoint to those that automatically write off the Cheyenne II without a second thought.

While not that relevant to the discussion at hand, it should be at least noted that the Cheyenne and Cheyenne II in the PSP Macross Ultimate Frontier game are far more versatile and comabt effective than the Tomahawk, Spartan and Phalanx (at least I find them so).

Graham

Link to comment
Share on other sites

* In SDF Macross, the absolute maximum duration Hikaru's training could have been is approximately 45 days, assuming "Transformation" takes place on March 1, and that he had only been on duty for a day or so before "Daedalus Attack". That 45 day period includes not only his Valkyrie pilot training, but the basic training seen in the montage as well. This is less than half the 15 weeks normally allocated in modern militaries for training on a tank.

** Assuming Milia didn't start training for a place in the U.N. Spacy until after the wedding, her pilot training cannot have lasted more than 13 days prior to her entering combat in "Love Drifts Away".

The disparity can't possibly be THAT big, so presumably destroid training ought to be rather easy by comparison (only one mode to worry about), and clearly VF training isn't the sort of thing you need years and OCS to get to grips with as was previously suggested.

Wasn't Milia already a ace pilot in the Zentrady/Meltran army so she was simply transitioning to a new vehicle not learning to fly for the first time.

Destroid only operate on the ground, or flying around less than a hundred feet of the ground.

I would assume the only thing a destroid pilot has to worry about is being hit by enemy fire though Destroyd pilots on a space ship might have the danger of falling off the ship and being stranded in space.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's one way of looking at it.

The way I see it is that after Space War I, the Destroids Tomahawk, Phalanx and Spartan were found to be extremely lacking in the necessary offensive and defensive capabilities, not to mention mobility to combat Zentran/Meltran mecha on a 1/1 basis, which could explain why we have not seen any futher development of those models (non-canon Macross II not withstanding). The Destroid monster while more than adequate in offensive capabilty was found lacking in mobility, hence the developemont of the more mobile and self-transporting Konig Monster.

Whereas perhaps the Cheyenne was found to be more capable and suitable for further development than the original Destroids, hence the Cheyenne II in Macross Frontier. Whereas the original Tomahawk , Phalanx and Spartan are seen relegated to construction mecha duties and then to nothing more than amusement park attractions by 2045 in Macross 7.

While the Cheyenne II is superficially similar to the original Cheyenne, it seems to offer enhanced capabilites over the original SDFM Destoids and the original Macross Zero Cheyenne. Note the twin heavy duty beam weapons, two heavy-caliber gunpod class gattling type guns, and larger twin missile launchers, not to mention the obvious improved mobility over the SDFM class destroids offered by the wheeled feet.

As mentioned, while superficially similar in outward apearance, the Cheyenne II could likely have far improved armor weapons, sensors, mobility etc than the original SDFM Destroids or the first mark Cheyenne from Macross Zero.

It could be said that an M4 Sherman and MI Abrams are superficially similar. Both are tanks, have tracks, a turret and a main gun, but are worlds apart in terms of capability.

Just a counterpoint to those that automatically write off the Cheyenne II without a second thought.

While not that relevant to the discussion at hand, it should be at least noted that the Cheyenne and Cheyenne II in the PSP Macross Ultimate Frontier game are far more versatile and comabt effective than the Tomahawk, Spartan and Phalanx (at least I find them so).

Graham

Graham, if I may be so bold, your points don't pass the smell test...

SMS was shown to be a developer of weapons systems, and they were, essentially, feild testing the VF-25 airframe and systems, based on their own YF-24 test platform. Does it make sense, then, for SMS to feild a ground-combat mecha that is essentially a throw-back, while working with the proposed replacement for the VF-171?

I can't buy it, to be honest.

It would be tantamount to a current-day aircraft carrier feilding a fleet of JSF fighters, and their marine contingent being relegated to older M-48 or M-60 tanks, to be used for shore landings and such, and also having nothing more that 40mm Bofors guns for air defense in the age of self-guided missiles and CIWS-type defense platforms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Graham, if I may be so bold, your points don't pass the smell test...

SMS was shown to be a developer of weapons systems, and they were, essentially, feild testing the VF-25 airframe and systems, based on their own YF-24 test platform. Does it make sense, then, for SMS to feild a ground-combat mecha that is essentially a throw-back, while working with the proposed replacement for the VF-171?

I can't buy it, to be honest.

It would be tantamount to a current-day aircraft carrier feilding a fleet of JSF fighters, and their marine contingent being relegated to older M-48 or M-60 tanks, to be used for shore landings and such, and also having nothing more that 40mm Bofors guns for air defense in the age of self-guided missiles and CIWS-type defense platforms.

Apples and oranges. The M4 being updated and upgraded into a MI holds a lot more water then you're giving it credit for. For starters, it's Macross canon (Macross Chronicle, Technology sheet 2B). Secondly, it's not pre-SWI technology being utilized, but the technology available in the 2050's. Lastly, the Cheyenne II was developed and is primarily used by the NUNS of the Macross Frontier fleet. SMS uses it simply because it's cost-effective, and as their ship, the Macross Quarter, was built by the Macross Frontier fleet, it makes sense that the designers of the ship would implement what's standard on the emigration fleet.

Not to mention that a) we don't ever see SMS use the Cheyenne II in a ground combat role (that's the NUNS doing it), and b) the SMS are only ever seen using the Cheyenne II in an air defense role...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, let me get this straight... instead of contributing to the discussion in any meaningful way, you're going to make snide, nonsensical remarks because you find something objectionable about my backing up my points with examples? I'm at a loss for words... <_<

I'm sorry if I find your example of a video game character a bit daft.

Even for Macross.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The point that I'm laboriously trying to get to through these examples is that the disparity in difficulty between destroid combat training and battroid combat training can't be THAT large

I would agree. Most of the disparity is going to come from needing to know how to operate three different vehicles and switch between them on the fly.

* In SDF Macross, the absolute maximum duration Hikaru's training could have been is approximately 45 days, assuming "Transformation" takes place on March 1, and that he had only been on duty for a day or so before "Daedalus Attack". That 45 day period includes not only his Valkyrie pilot training, but the basic training seen in the montage as well. This is less than half the 15 weeks normally allocated in modern militaries for training on a tank.

Hikaru is also a special case on multiple levels.

He already has extensive aircraft experience(which apparently carries over to basic GERWALK operation), and the Macross is doing a rush-job on training.

They get the pilots to the point where they CAN fight, and throw 'em out there because they need a pilot NOW more than they need the best pilots they can get.

If they have someone that already knows how to fly a plane, so much the better. Show him how to change it to a robot, have him do a few laps around the block, and get that boy a fighter jet. He'll get over this ridiculous pacifist kick once someone's shooting at him.

** Assuming Milia didn't start training for a place in the U.N. Spacy until after the wedding, her pilot training cannot have lasted more than 13 days prior to her entering combat in "Love Drifts Away".

A veteran combat ace is scored the same as a complete rookie?

She's BEEN through basic training, advanced training, and EXTENSIVE real-world combat experience. Hardly a raw recruit.

And the operation principles for human and zentradi mechs aren't that different, so much of her training should carry over.

In fact, they're so similar that Hikaru, Max, Misa, and Kakizaki can operate a Regult with NO zentradi mecha training, or even the ability to read the control labels, despite being MUCH smaller than the intended operator.

And while it's rampant speculation, I like the idea that the first-date arcade machine is actually a simplified simulator sponsored by the ship's military officials.

There's absolutely no evidence to support it, but it makes sense, given the severe shortage of pilots and rush-job training. If they come in knowing the basics of how to fly, drive, and shoot, they can suit up and hop into a brownie that much faster after enlisting.

The disparity can't possibly be THAT big, so presumably destroid training ought to be rather easy by comparison (only one mode to worry about), and clearly VF training isn't the sort of thing you need years and OCS to get to grips with as was previously suggested.

No argument that destroids are easier to operate.

Even if they weren't originally(due to being older and less streamlined), there is no technology applied to the Valkyries that can't be used on the Destroids.

Like I said last year, I think the big problem is we just haven't seen a setting since the original series where a large Destroid force makes SENSE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apples and oranges. The M4 being updated and upgraded into a MI holds a lot more water then you're giving it credit for. For starters, it's Macross canon (Macross Chronicle, Technology sheet 2B). Secondly, it's not pre-SWI technology being utilized, but the technology available in the 2050's. Lastly, the Cheyenne II was developed and is primarily used by the NUNS of the Macross Frontier fleet. SMS uses it simply because it's cost-effective, and as their ship, the Macross Quarter, was built by the Macross Frontier fleet, it makes sense that the designers of the ship would implement what's standard on the emigration fleet.

Not to mention that a) we don't ever see SMS use the Cheyenne II in a ground combat role (that's the NUNS doing it), and b) the SMS are only ever seen using the Cheyenne II in an air defense role...

"The only significant differences found were in terms of seeds, the involvement of Johnny Appleseed, and color."

-James Barone, British Medical Journal

This truly is a comparison of apples and oranges, because the concepts are so similar. Upgrades are cheaper than new machines. New machines are cheaper than new designs. Thus, the Cheyenne-II.

I would agree. Most of the disparity is going to come from needing to know how to operate three different vehicles and switch between them on the fly.

Hikaru is also a special case on multiple levels.

He already has extensive aircraft experience(which apparently carries over to basic GERWALK operation), and the Macross is doing a rush-job on training.

They get the pilots to the point where they CAN fight, and throw 'em out there because they need a pilot NOW more than they need the best pilots they can get.

If they have someone that already knows how to fly a plane, so much the better. Show him how to change it to a robot, have him do a few laps around the block, and get that boy a fighter jet. He'll get over this ridiculous pacifist kick once someone's shooting at him.

A veteran combat ace is scored the same as a complete rookie?

She's BEEN through basic training, advanced training, and EXTENSIVE real-world combat experience. Hardly a raw recruit.

No argument that destroids are easier to operate.

Even if they weren't originally(due to being older and less streamlined), there is no technology applied to the Valkyries that can't be used on the Destroids.

Like I said last year, I think the big problem is we just haven't seen a setting since the original series where a large Destroid force makes SENSE.

They always look for the special ones. If you have a skill, the military will try to capitalize on it. Thus, Milia and Hikaru.

Anyway, the Cheyenne-II was only used in the SMS aboard Mac Quarter, as AA turrets, essentially, fulfilling their designed role. The rest were, as stated previously, NUNS. Big destroid forces make little sense, in the Spacy. The game has changed, somewhat, from swarm tactics to... Swarm tactics. Uh, the point is, there aren't usually destroids because they don't move too good in space. In SDFM, they stood atop the Macross and fired. In later versions, they never got that chance. The Macross was always sitting back a bit, as in a real ship battle. Keep the carrier out of harm's way. So, the Destroids' targeting range is killed because of the distance. Besides, anything a Destroid can do, a VF can do in space, due to being unbounded by the necessity for lift or aerodynamics.

Big engines with T-W ratios way higher than 1 strapped aboard high-maneuverability space fighters will out-prioritize heavy guns that can't move independently of a ship and can't avoid enemy fire.

Like, on an aircraft carrier, they have their F-18s, but no 120-mm cannons. Why waste space for something that'll serve no practical purpose? We have whole fleets with destroyers packing that firepower instead. This is that concept.

So, yeah, no destroids. UN Army, though, most likely. Marines? Probably.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whereas perhaps the Cheyenne was found to be more capable and suitable for further development than the original Destroids, hence the Cheyenne II in Macross Frontier. Whereas the original Tomahawk , Phalanx and Spartan are seen relegated to construction mecha duties and then to nothing more than amusement park attractions by 2045 in Macross 7.

It sounds good on paper, but in terms of actual implementation it sounds more like a nightmare. It just doesn't make a bit of sense for the New U.N. Spacy to have gone back to a pre-Space War 1 design that'd likely never been used against the Zentradi and giving it a top-to-bottom refit. It'd make a hell of a lot more sense for the New U.N. Spacy to have evaluated the shortcomings of the most recent batch of destroids, and followed the same sort of design evaluation process we get in real world military procurement, having a few new designs or variants competing against each other, and tweaking them until you get one that meets both the immediate and predicted needs of the military. What one would expect to come out of a process like this would've been something at least superficially similar to the Tomahawk II from Macross II... a destroid descended from the Space War 1-era designs, but incorporating new features and design chances to meet the military's changing needs.

Had the ADR-03 Cheyenne stayed in service through Space War 1 and the subsequent conflicts, you wouldn't be seeing many, if any, objections, because then it could easily and logically be excused as a phased upgrade program keeping an old but undoubtedly effective platform in service, much like the modern B-52.

Wasn't Milia already a ace pilot in the Zentrady/Meltran army so she was simply transitioning to a new vehicle not learning to fly for the first time.

I'd concede that point were it not for the fact that she's transitioning between two units with radically different control systems, to say nothing of their rather different flight characteristics and means of staying aloft... (the Q-Rau flying on inertia control and raw thrust, the VF-1 flying on lift). Considering how different they are, I really can't see that being an easy transition... though if it was we'd have to discount Misty on the same grounds due to her status as a top Meltrandi power armor ace.

I'm sorry if I find your example of a video game character a bit daft. Even for Macross.

Sorry if you don't like it, but I'm not the one who started introducing them as evidence... the first one brought up as an example of pilot training's duration was Aegis Focker, and he's from a (nominally) canon video game too. If it's a canon story (and yes, Macross: Eternal Love Song is a canon part of Macross II's continuity) then I'm not seeing a problem. I could maybe understand your objections if it were something from one of the non-canon games like Scrambled Valkyrie...

I would agree. Most of the disparity is going to come from needing to know how to operate three different vehicles and switch between them on the fly.

Given what Roy says to Hikaru early on in SDF Macross, it would seem to be a problem mitigated considerably by the similarity in control between fighter and GERWALK.

Hikaru is also a special case on multiple levels.

He already has extensive aircraft experience(which apparently carries over to basic GERWALK operation), and the Macross is doing a rush-job on training. They get the pilots to the point where they CAN fight, and throw 'em out there because they need a pilot NOW more than they need the best pilots they can get.

Granted, but that the training could be completed at a rush and produce competent pilots from people who've probably never flown before (Kakizaki and Jenius) in a matter of weeks instead of years speaks volumes as to how easy it is to operate a Valkyrie. Just a common sense examination would point to the major disparity in difficulty coming from them also having to learn to fly, which should make cross-training for a destroid a snap. It definitely doesn't augur well for the assertion that Valkyries must be substantially more difficult to train for (and thus make all pilots highly trained officers) than destroids (asserted to be operated by enlisted men).

And the operation principles for human and zentradi mechs aren't that different, so much of her training should carry over.

Like I said above, were it not for the completely different control system and their rather different flight characteristics, I'd consider it probably a wash in terms of difficulty. The transition definitely isn't going to be painless if she's switching over to something that flies differently than anything she's ever used before and has a somewhat unfamiliar control system. Yes, she'd probably learn quickly enough, but the point is that even starting from scratch in terms of how the controls work, she was able to pick it up fairly easily.

It'd be like dropping someone who's only ever driven cars with automatic transmissions into a car with a stick shift and expecting them to win a race the very next day.

In fact, they're so similar that Hikaru, Max, Misa, and Kakizaki can operate a Regult with NO zentradi mecha training, or even the ability to read the control labels, despite being MUCH smaller than the intended operator.

"Operate" might be a bit generous... they just shot a few people with the gun, blew a hole in the wall, fell out, and drifted away. We also should account for the obvious in that the Regult probably isn't that difficult or complicated to operate, as the Zentradi aren't exactly a tech-savvy people prior to meeting up with humanity. Making it complicated and difficult to operate would be counterproductive when your average soldier's intelligence is no better than that of a primary school child.

And while it's rampant speculation, I like the idea that the first-date arcade machine is actually a simplified simulator sponsored by the ship's military officials.

There's absolutely no evidence to support it, but it makes sense, given the severe shortage of pilots and rush-job training. If they come in knowing the basics of how to fly, drive, and shoot, they can suit up and hop into a brownie that much faster after enlisting.

Not a fan of the movie The Last Starfighter, are you? :lol:

No argument that destroids are easier to operate.

If only because you don't have to teach the mook in the cockpit how to fly... one would imagine the heavier weapons and variety of different setups might require a fair bit of cross-training for a pilot to be effective and able to switch on short notice to compensate for casualties. (Which, given the dire straits the Macross was in, is almost a certainty)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Given what Roy says to Hikaru early on in SDF Macross, it would seem to be a problem mitigated considerably by the similarity in control between fighter and GERWALK.

Indeed. Though I'm curious HOW close they are.

I mean, clearly the GERWALK has wings, but it also has arms and ground effect thrusters.

Granted, but that the training could be completed at a rush and produce competent pilots from people who've probably never flown before (Kakizaki and Jenius) in a matter of weeks instead of years speaks volumes as to how easy it is to operate a Valkyrie. Just a common sense examination would point to the major disparity in difficulty coming from them also having to learn to fly, which should make cross-training for a destroid a snap. It definitely doesn't augur well for the assertion that Valkyries must be substantially more difficult to train for (and thus make all pilots highly trained officers) than destroids (asserted to be operated by enlisted men).

I'm curious if Max and Kakizaki were in training longer, since they had to go to flight school.

...

Or if Hikaru was there longer because he had to unlearn atmospheric expectations that don't apply in a vacuum... dammit, why did I think of that just now?

But he seemed to grasp the issue easy enough with his stunt plane.

Like I said above, were it not for the completely different control system and their rather different flight characteristics, I'd consider it probably a wash in terms of difficulty. The transition definitely isn't going to be painless if she's switching over to something that flies differently than anything she's ever used before and has a somewhat unfamiliar control system. Yes, she'd probably learn quickly enough, but the point is that even starting from scratch in terms of how the controls work, she was able to pick it up fairly easily.

It'd be like dropping someone who's only ever driven cars with automatic transmissions into a car with a stick shift and expecting them to win a race the very next day.

I'd expect her to have training in more than one vehicle, really. She's an elite ace and special ops and yadda-yadda. Even a spy!

Admittedly, the zentradi definition of spy is iffy at best and seems to consist more of "You're all alone and wearing a burlap sack" than any special training, but... let's run with it. :p

But you identified the VF-1 as flying on lift. It most certainly didn't, not when Millia joined up.

In the vacuum of space, you fly and maneuver on thrust, or you don't fly. So the only real issue is the controls, which are a question mark(as far as I know, there's no source image for Q-Rau controls, so all we know is pilot arms won't fit inside mech arms).

Maybe the Valk isn't as fast and nimble as a Q-Rau, but it handles much the same. It's more like trading from a Ferrari to a Fiesta.

Sure everything's laid out a bit different, and you don't have near as much kick, but it still works the same.

"Operate" might be a bit generous... they just shot a few people with the gun, blew a hole in the wall, fell out, and drifted away.

They identified the controls and hit the target first try, though. There weren't any false starts as they flicked switches trying to identify the right controls.

I believe they used the comm unit to call for help, too.

We also should account for the obvious in that the Regult probably isn't that difficult or complicated to operate, as the Zentradi aren't exactly a tech-savvy people prior to meeting up with humanity. Making it complicated and difficult to operate would be counterproductive when your average soldier's intelligence is no better than that of a primary school child.

But they can be implanted with detailed piloting knowledge in the cloning chambers.

While they can't REPAIR their gear, operating complex aerospace vehicles could be as second-nature as breathing.

The zentradi are lopsided, from our perspective. SOCIALLY, they're children that don't know how to interact with the real world. MILITARILY speaking, they're closer to hardened veterans with decades of experience.

Not a fan of the movie The Last Starfighter, are you? :lol:

Moi? Surely you jest!

Seriously, I wasn't thinking of Last Starfighter... I wonder if that was subconscious...

If only because you don't have to teach the mook in the cockpit how to fly... one would imagine the heavier weapons and variety of different setups might require a fair bit of cross-training for a pilot to be effective and able to switch on short notice to compensate for casualties. (Which, given the dire straits the Macross was in, is almost a certainty)
The destroids also don't have as complex a design. Weapons are all pointed forward. You just turn to face your target and unload.

Now, using a Spartan effectively, THAT I would expect to require a good bit of training. It's designed for melee combat, and has real arms(among other things).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Indeed. Though I'm curious HOW close they are.

Close enough for an experienced pilot like Hikaru to have a relatively easy time of it so long as he didn't do anything fancy. He didn't seem to have much trouble with the hands either until he lost one (and more importantly, the contents) to enemy fire.

I'm curious if Max and Kakizaki were in training longer, since they had to go to flight school.

...

Or if Hikaru was there longer because he had to unlearn atmospheric expectations that don't apply in a vacuum... dammit, why did I think of that just now?

Odds are that Hikaru probably had the shorter training duration because he was already at least familiar with flying in fighter mode. Curiously, they don't mention whether or not he was placed on an accelerated training track because of it. One would expect Kakizaki and Max to have taken somewhat longer as neither had any prior flying experience (that we know of). In terms of destroid training, Hikaru never had any formal training (again, that we know of) but he didn't have much difficulty operating a Spartan Mk.II on short notice.

It is possible they lumped the basic battroid skills training together with destroid training, and odds are the controls aren't terribly dissimilar either.

I'd expect her to have training in more than one vehicle, really. She's an elite ace and special ops and yadda-yadda. Even a spy!

Admittedly, the zentradi definition of spy is iffy at best and seems to consist more of "You're all alone and wearing a burlap sack" than any special training, but... let's run with it. :p

Dubious... I don't think we ever really see the female side operating anything other than the Queadluun-Rau in the TV series, do we? Not exactly rich fodder for cross-training if all of the other mecha are the exclusive property of the males...

But you identified the VF-1 as flying on lift. It most certainly didn't, not when Millia joined up.

In the vacuum of space, you fly and maneuver on thrust, or you don't fly. So the only real issue is the controls, which are a question mark(as far as I know, there's no source image for Q-Rau controls, so all we know is pilot arms won't fit inside mech arms).

Apart from the unidentified wirey-bits that plug into the flightsuit, there's some kind of hand interface that is shown in the DYRL lineart... lemme get ya a pic:

Image courtesy of Mr. March's Macross Mecha Manual

It also sounds somewhat unlikely that the Valkyrie pilot's training would be space only, and even if we assume it was, the two mecha in question hardly handle the same... <_<

They identified the controls and hit the target first try, though. There weren't any false starts as they flicked switches trying to identify the right controls.

I believe they used the comm unit to call for help, too.

Well, yes... but my point stands... it's entirely likely that the Zentradi mecha are designed for maximum ease of use (and we know they're designed to be as maintenance-free as alien-ly? possible... it stands to reason if you expect a legion of soldiers with a primary school level of mental ability to operate it, you'd better damn well make everything obvious.

The destroids also don't have as complex a design. Weapons are all pointed forward. You just turn to face your target and unload.

One would imagine that the rather unique role the destroids filled aboard the SDF-1 would require some specialized training beyond "point this at the enemy and pull the trigger". The destroid tactics bit in Chronicle seems to suggest that they had at least a reasonable set of tactics going for them, which would probably require at least a bit of training... to say nothing of special circumstances like urban combat (which comes up a few times) where the goal is flattening the enemy and ONLY the enemy. That takes a bit more finesse than spraying and praying, and rather more to not step on things like civilians, public utilities, etc.

Edited by Seto Kaiba
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dubious... I don't think we ever really see the female side operating anything other than the Queadluun-Rau in the TV series, do we? Not exactly rich fodder for cross-training if all of the other mecha are the exclusive property of the males...

Ya know, I've always thought of the Gnerl fighter as a "girl's mech." And I'm not sure why.

...

Maybe just because we never see a pilot for one, and there's a lot less ladies shown than guys(Millia, Lap'Lamiz... and that's it)

Or maybe it's some silly Robotechism I picked up somewhere.

It's non-canon, any way you slice it. Welcome to my head, population sqrt(-1)

Apart from the unidentified wirey-bits that plug into the flightsuit, there's some kind of hand interface that is shown in the DYRL lineart... lemme get ya a pic:

Image courtesy of Mr. March's Macross Mecha Manual

It also sounds somewhat unlikely that the Valkyrie pilot's training would be space only, and even if we assume it was, the two mecha in question hardly handle the same... <_<

Ooooh, I hadn't seen that one! Now I know!

...

Wonder how they fire their guns that way...

There'd be highly limited opportunities for aerial Valkyrie practice aboard the Macross, was the angle I was approaching from. I admit the Macross had a... unique... training regimen, but it's the one that matters for most of the show, and for Millia's first Valk sorties.

I don't think the handling would be THAT dis-similar in a vacuum, though. Especially once the super packs are added.

In the absence of air, the shape of the vehicle makes no difference. What matters is is if the main thrust is balanced aligned along the center of mass(so it doesn't spin the spaceship like crazy when you try to thrust), how much power you have(determines maximum acceleration), and vernier placement(for changing orientation and "sidestepping").

With both vehicles meeting the balanced thrust issue, it becomes a matter of performance more than anything.

Admittedly, they're on pretty much opposite ends of the performance spectrum(the way the Q-Rau bulls through atmosphere like it's not there, it's got some crazy vernier output), but still operating from the same rulebook.

*shrug*

One would imagine that the rather unique role the destroids filled aboard the SDF-1 would require some specialized training beyond "point this at the enemy and pull the trigger". The destroid tactics bit in Chronicle seems to suggest that they had at least a reasonable set of tactics going for them, which would probably require at least a bit of training... to say nothing of special circumstances like urban combat (which comes up a few times) where the goal is flattening the enemy and ONLY the enemy. That takes a bit more finesse than spraying and praying, and rather more to not step on things like civilians, public utilities, etc.

Definitely. Just saying, in terms of operation, they're easier to aim with as well. A Valk in battroid mode can be firing any which way imaginable, but a Destroid will always be firing the direction it's facing.

In terms of versatility, this goes to the Valk, but the Destroid wins ease of operation there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It sounds good on paper, but in terms of actual implementation it sounds more like a nightmare. It just doesn't make a bit of sense for the New U.N. Spacy to have gone back to a pre-Space War 1 design that'd likely never been used against the Zentradi and giving it a top-to-bottom refit.

The Tomahawk is older than the Cheyenne. And if you want to talk about evaluations, well the original three Destroids died a lot against non-transforming mecha, while the Cheyenne died a lot against transforming mecha.

So the Cheyenne II has the better pedigree.

Sorry if you don't like it, but I'm not the one who started introducing them as evidence... the first one brought up as an example of pilot training's duration was Aegis Focker, and he's from a (nominally) canon video game too. If it's a canon story (and yes, Macross: Eternal Love Song is a canon part of Macross II's continuity) then I'm not seeing a problem. I could maybe understand your objections if it were something from one of the non-canon games like Scrambled Valkyrie...

Yeah that's just as stupid. He's a video game character who has to pilot a billion different Valkyries because that's the only way the player will get to use them all. And your precious Misty Klaus is from a bleeding turn based game. Does that mean she's really good when she and the Zentradi take turns strafing each other?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dubious... I don't think we ever really see the female side operating anything other than the Queadluun-Rau in the TV series, do we? Not exactly rich fodder for cross-training if all of the other mecha are the exclusive property of the males...

Laplamiz drives a Glaug once post SWI. Course her boyfriend is Quamzin. How the heck did those two end up together?!

Edited by RedWolf
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Definitely. Just saying, in terms of operation, they're easier to aim with as well. A Valk in battroid mode can be firing any which way imaginable, but a Destroid will always be firing the direction it's facing.

In terms of versatility, this goes to the Valk, but the Destroid wins ease of operation there.

Depends on the destroid, really... there is a certain degree of flexibility in the ankle of the Tomahawk's particle beam cannons, and of course guided munitions don't need to necessarily be pointed directly at the target either. The Valkyrie may be more versatile in terms of field of fire, but its armament options are somewhat more limited, whereas any one destroid pilot is likely going to have to be proficient at operating a significantly more diverse assortment of integrated weapons (missile launchers, AA guns, beam cannons, machineguns, flamethrowers, grenade launchers, you name it).

The Tomahawk is older than the Cheyenne. And if you want to talk about evaluations, well the original three Destroids died a lot against non-transforming mecha, while the Cheyenne died a lot against transforming mecha. So the Cheyenne II has the better pedigree.

Okay... granted, that's a very interesting irrelevant conclusion you've arrived at. Not to point out the painfully obvious hole in your argument or anything, but the "uncultured" Zentradi don't have transforming mecha. The full extent of the ADR-03 Mk.III Cheyenne's combat record is a single, isolated incident before Space War 1, on the Earth's surface, and against mecha that were below even the VF-1's tech level. The original four destroids (Tomahawk, Defender, Phalanx, Spartan) accumulated a respectable record against the Zentradi, despite fighting against overwhelming odds in almost every engagement, and in a greater assortment of conditions. That being said, the extremely limited combat record of the Cheyenne I doesn't really support the assertion that its successor has a superior pedigree.

Also, I don't think the claim that the Tomahawk is older is really supportable either... Chronicle seems to indicate that the 04-series destroids were developed after the 03-series, and since the timeline hasn't offered us an exact date for when the Cheyenne I's development started or ended, all we can say is that the Tomahawk entered mass production first. It doesn't seem likely that the Cheyenne is a newer design, since its technology is somewhat more primitive, using a gas turbine for power instead of a thermonuclear reactor, etc.

Yeah that's just as stupid. He's a video game character who has to pilot a billion different Valkyries because that's the only way the player will get to use them all. And your precious Misty Klaus is from a bleeding turn based game. Does that mean she's really good when she and the Zentradi take turns strafing each other?

Okay, you don't like it. Tough beans, both Aegis Focker and Misty Klaus are canon to their respective timelines, as are their exploits. They're every bit as valid as characters as Hikaru or Komilia.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, you don't like it. Tough beans, both Aegis Focker and Misty Klaus are canon to their respective timelines, as are their exploits. They're every bit as valid as characters as Hikaru or Komilia.

Ah, but are their respective timelines applicable to the Destroids and Variable Fighters under discussion? There's no doubt that Misty Klaus is a capable pilot in her respective timeline, but is she equally capable in Aegis Focker's timeline? Are either as capable in the M0 or MF timelines?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...