Macross Models 3D colelction

[PointBlankSniper]

Looks like a simple enough mod for the top one. The second one though, I'm not sure what's going on with the arms or if it even makes sense to have that much articulation on a forklift, with a fist in the way too lmao. But it sure does look awsome. Those forks could have been arm blades or one of those pronged beam guns lol

I always wished Kawamori did more with these. They get so llittle screen time its hard to even tell or remember how they look lol. If he can turn the monster into a transformable plane, I'm sure he can at least turn cheyenne into a tank or apc. He's done valk but with car in his Last Hope Pandora anime before, so that's not even much of a stretch to ask for.

[guyxxed]

The arms are definitely weird on the Delta version. I need to go back and watch the episode clips again to see what each piece is meant to do.  I thought I remembered the hands and forks being opposite ends of a reversible arm (like the Cheyenne does with its guns, and has the hands on its elbows until needed), but that line art makes it look like the hands fold down from the upper arms.  Will see what I can find in the animation. 

I actually always had the opposite feeling on Macross designs:  if Valks can be made so tough when they're dividing the power between flying and holding themselves together, then a destroid with a dedicated power source should be a lot tougher.  Mobility vs sitting duck, I know, but the armor on a Cheyenne should still be an order of magnitude greater than a Valk just because it can afford to throw a lot more power at it.

Transforming tanks would be cool, too, though.  😉

[Seto Kaiba]

On 2/7/2026 at 3:40 PM, guyxxed said:

First pass at a Frontier-style workroid.  Both the Frontier and Delta workroids are just the Cheyenne with various amounts of editing, but I was surprised at how much of a Cheyenne they both are.

Really?  The official writeup of the Destroid Works is very blunt that it's literally just a Cheyenne II that's been stripped of its military hardware and given a coat of hi-viz orange paint.

 

9 hours ago, PointBlankSniper said:

I always wished Kawamori did more with these. They get so llittle screen time its hard to even tell or remember how they look lol. If he can turn the monster into a transformable plane, I'm sure he can at least turn cheyenne into a tank or apc. He's done valk but with car in his Last Hope Pandora anime before, so that's not even much of a stretch to ask for.

The Cheyenne II is a barely-there presence in Macross Frontier and Macross Delta because Destroids in general are pretty useless in a post-First Space War world.

Destroids as a whole were designed around the idea of fighting a land war in a conventional alien invasion scenario.  Something that just does not happen in Macross.  They're land warfare weapons in a space war setting.  Making it transform would defeat the other key attribute of a Destroid... being cheaper than a Valkyrie so that they can be fielded in larger numbers.  Not that a transforming tank would be any less useless in a space war than a regular non-transforming ground-bound robot.  

The main reason the Frontier fleet uses them is because they wanted mobile AA defenses they could deploy inside the dome.  Outside the dome is protected by more cost-effective static beam CIWS and missile phalanx systems. 

 

2 hours ago, guyxxed said:

I actually always had the opposite feeling on Macross designs:  if Valks can be made so tough when they're dividing the power between flying and holding themselves together, then a destroid with a dedicated power source should be a lot tougher.  Mobility vs sitting duck, I know, but the armor on a Cheyenne should still be an order of magnitude greater than a Valk just because it can afford to throw a lot more power at it.

So... that's not quite how it works.  Let me explain.

It's not as simple as just "Destroids don't need to split power so they should be a lot tougher."  You're assuming that all things are equal, and they're not.

Valkyries are aircraft as much as they are giant robots.  Their armor has to be kept thin and lightweight in order to preserve their flight performance and leave room for the internally carried fuel and other vital stores and systems.  As such, they have to rely on more advanced and expensive composite armor reinforced by energy conversion armor driven by their pair of high-output thermonuclear reactors to achieve the required defensive performance.  Those reactors HAVE to be high-output in order to meet the needs of the various other energy-hungry systems on a Valkyrie too, like thrust generation and active stealth, which makes them incredibly expensive.

Destroids are walking AFVs and artillery built for land and surface warfare.  They don't need to fly, and that means they don't need to make the same design compromises that the Valkyries did.  They can achieve the required defensive performance by just having thicker composite armor.  Not needing to provide plasma for thrust production or feed energy-intensive systems like active stealth and energy conversion armor means they can get by with a single, much cheaper and lower-output reactor instead of a pair of expensive high-end thermonuclear reaction turbine engines.  At the end of the day, this makes them much cheaper than a Valkyrie.  The early Destroids were about 1/20th the cost of a VF-1 back before the First Space War.  Of course, this also means they don't have tons of extra power to throw around because their systems are tailored to their needs not the far greater needs of a Valkyrie.

Because Destroids are inherently groundbound in a world where most combat is in the aerospace domain, keeping Destroids as cheap as possible is the only thing keeping them going as a supplement to even less expensive conventional anti-aircraft defenses like beam CIWS guns and missile phalanxes.  

If you were to give a destroid all the same tech as a Valkyrie, you'd have just made a Valkyrie mode-locked in Battroid mode and gotten rid of most of the cost advantage.

Edited yesterday at 01:11 AM by Seto Kaiba

[sketchley]

5 hours ago, guyxxed said:

I actually always had the opposite feeling on Macross designs:  if Valks can be made so tough when they're dividing the power between flying and holding themselves together, then a destroid with a dedicated power source should be a lot tougher.  Mobility vs sitting duck, I know, but the armor on a Cheyenne should still be an order of magnitude greater than a Valk just because it can afford to throw a lot more power at it.

One thing to keep in mind is the requirements of the plot.  Destroids aren't the reason why a lot of people tune in to Macross, and they are more or less superfluous to the plot—in the sense that above and beyond being the thing that gets shot at to demonstrate the power of the antagonists, they don't have much of a role.

So, even if we presume that the defensive capabilities of a Destroid's armour is exactly the same as (or even greater than!) that of the Energy Conversion Armour on a Battroid-mode VF (along the lines of Seto's desription above), the Destroid is still going to be easily blown away due to its role in the story.

 

That said, one of the "boss" enemies in the Macross M3 game is a PPB equipped Destroid Monster (if memory serves).  That suggests there is the possibility of a low-cost upgrade to Destroids that significantly increases their defensive capabilities (low-cost in the sense that PPB projectors and an upgraded reactor would require less resources than replacing the entire surface with SWAG armour and a much, much higher output reactor.)

[PointBlankSniper]

I didn't want to go down the technical lore and realism rabbit hole that I kind of knew was coming, so I kept my comment to the rule of cool lol.

Yall have valid points but aren't putting it together to see the bigger picture. I thought this through ever since wanting to see more out of them. It's very simple, plot dictates their place in the story as pointed out, then the solution is simply demand a plot that gives them a place to shine.

If spacecraft and aircraft are too powerful, knock them down a peg. Make their armor too weak for new enemies. Make them easy targets in the type of fighting involved. Make them too costly for the volume of enemies they are up against. Make terrestial battles important. For all of these things, the scaling is relative. Since tech has gone so far for valkyries, tech can advance just as much for destroids, in ways that are to their advantage.

There are tons of specific ways to go about all this. The easy example, look at how muv-luv did away with combat aircraft in their universe. The enemy simply has overwhelmingly powerful anti air lasers. Mechs are reduced to walking and low hover, or terrain shielded mad dashes. Track and wheeled vehicles and mecha can totally shine in such a setting, where flying machines were previously all powerful.

If valks are that costly to make, and have only advanced to become that much more costly, then cheap manufacturing of relatively lower tech machines could easily have advanced by just as much. On the flip side, they could have the same tech as valkyries, applied to their advantage. If power plant is not used for high speed thrust, then it can be diverted to having bs amounts of barrier, or that much more power for beam weapons. Being on the ground with active fold stealth could make them even more stealthy than aircraft, despite being a tank. With all the bs fold magic that has been introduced in universe, the could recieve the same level of benefits, instead of fold travel, they could have ridiculous powers like using fold tech to dimensionally anchor themselves and resist a certain degree of dimension bombing. So long as they aren't depicted to fly remotely as fast as a valk, they can be explained away with low cost and higher offensive and defensive power.

There are plenty of other ways to frame their tactical relevance with all that setup. Like how konig monsters need to land to have a stable firing platform, destroids could just be in tank mode and be stable and fire at the same time, with comparable fire power, while laying low. Ground based shoot and scoot artillery is a real world advantage, in warefare where anti air weapons are a threat to aircraft. The scaling just has to be tweaked to fit that since this is fiction with every advancing tech and life forms.

Let's say there were creatures more durable than Vajra, and the existing science magic bombing and beaming isn't effective on destroying their planet. A fight has to be taken to the the core of the hive. Gravity is immense enough to hamper flight, and people have to use exosuits to stand hp. Psychic and electronic fold interference that is on a similar in scale to Var syndrome makes controlling an aircraft on the frontline very difficult, without being an ace pilot powered by the music of love polygons. Defeating the creatures requires destroying their underground hive with an experimental science device that require engineers on site to install. The stage is set to need a massive mechanized terrestrial infantry force, hard push their way through a whole monster planet. The only way that works, is by armor pushing in, conquering territory, while defending logistic bases along the way, until probing for a point of entry and reaching the heart of the swarm. Destroids need to handle everything from atmospheric entry, landing spearhead, occupation, base defense, artillery, infantry maneuver, kaiju brawls, troop and vip transport, and idol concert security, with limited pretty boy air support. The best a valkyrie can do in that scenario is be a cog in combined arms tactics. Destroid pilots can easily even be the main characters, because the series is called "macross", and not "valkyrie", so all that is needed is an oversized LCAC type ship cameo and transform every now and then lol.

[Seto Kaiba]

19 minutes ago, PointBlankSniper said:

Yall have valid points but aren't putting it together to see the bigger picture. I thought this through ever since wanting to see more out of them. It's very simple, plot dictates their place in the story as pointed out, then the solution is simply demand a plot that gives them a place to shine.

It's more than that. It's that the setting itself is designed in such a way that Destroids are not, and never will be, relevant. They are land warfare weapons in a setting where there's not really any land warfare going on.

If you have to radically change the rules of your entire setting in order to make something viable in context, you're better off just making a new setting. 

You've demonstrated that you understand this principle through your example of Muv-Luv and how that setting explains the absence of fighter jets as a central part of its premise. What's your pitching here is essentially the same thing as reintroducing fighter jets to that setting.

 

26 minutes ago, PointBlankSniper said:

If valks are that costly to make, and have only advanced to become that much more costly, then cheap manufacturing of relatively lower tech machines could easily have advanced by just as much.

If they were practical, sure. 

The main problem with this logic being that advancing a useless weapon offers no real benefit. Yeah I can absolutely make a better sword out of unobtanium, but it doesn't do me any good if the enemy will shoot me dead from a kilometer away. The Destroids all have essentially the same problem. No matter how much you improve their systems, it won't make them useful because the problem isn't their performance. It's that they are designed for a type of combat which is fundamentally obsolete in the setting. 

Macross Galaxy actually tried modernizing Destroids using VF tech in Macross the Ride and the end result was that it didn't really help. Those improved destroids fared no better because they were ultimately stuck hanging around on the hull of a ship in purely defensive roles waiting for the enemy to come into range. They had no way to take the fight to the enemy, meaning they offered no material advantage over just having beam CIWS systems and missile phalanxes that could do the same job for less money and without the need to put a human operator at risk.

 

 

40 minutes ago, PointBlankSniper said:

If power plant is not used for high speed thrust, then it can be diverted to having bs amounts of barrier, or that much more power for beam weapons.

Which does them no good because, again, they can't go on the offensive.

 

41 minutes ago, PointBlankSniper said:

Being on the ground with active fold stealth could make them even more stealthy than aircraft, despite being a tank.

That would actually offer no benefit at all. Because, as a ground weapon, they're pretty well below the minimum altitude for radar. They have no need of active stealth.

(Putting aside the fact that even on a Valkyrie active stealth is basically ineffective in Battroid mode, since it depends on the passive stealthiness of the fighter mode, so it wouldn't really work on a destroid anyway.)

 

43 minutes ago, PointBlankSniper said:

With all the bs fold magic that has been introduced in universe, the could recieve the same level of benefits, instead of fold travel, they could have ridiculous powers like using fold tech to dimensionally anchor themselves and resist a certain degree of dimension bombing.

There really isn't much in the way of "BS fold magic" going on outside of the YF-29. It's all pretty well within the realm of science. 

I'm not sure what the benefit of staying still extra hard would be when the fundamental problem is that they literally can't get into the same ZIP code with the enemy 99% of the time. 

 

46 minutes ago, PointBlankSniper said:

Ground based shoot and scoot artillery is a real world advantage, in warefare where anti air weapons are a threat to aircraft. The scaling just has to be tweaked to fit that since this is fiction with every advancing tech and life forms

But what are they shooting at? In this setting, a ground-based weapon is fundamentally sitting out of the fight because the fight is going on in deep space or in orbit. It's not shoot and scoot if you're never close enough to the enemy to do any shooting.

Considering the orbital bombardment is carried out on the strategic scale, you can't even say you're providing the gunners a moving target.

 

54 minutes ago, PointBlankSniper said:

Let's say there were creatures more durable than Vajra, and the existing science magic bombing and beaming isn't effective on destroying their planet.

Macross doesn't usually go in for genocide, so you've already thematically left the ballpark right at the start. Might as well just make that a new setting for a different franchise.

[guyxxed]

4 hours ago, Seto Kaiba said:

They had no way to take the fight to the enemy, meaning they offered no material advantage over just having beam CIWS systems and missile phalanxes that could do the same job for less money and without the need to put a human operator at risk.

This is actually the other thing that always pops to mind when thinking about destroids.  If they can't be made useful, why do they exist at all?  Yes, plot reasons, as sketchley pointed out, but in a setting with AI as advanced as we've seen and mechanical systems as durable and flexible as has been shown, why is CIWS not an impenetrable defense for just about any ship or fort?  It's already pretty formidable in current real world settings, in Macross it should mean that a fighter can never even get close to an opponent ship unless they fold right next to it.  For the most part, though, we only see WW2 style flak cannons spamming relatively uselessly into space while fighters fly in without much trouble.  

(This doesn't actually bother me all that much, it's just where my brain goes with any technical analysis of a setting.  Armchair quarterbacking, there's always a nit to pick!  😉)

[Seto Kaiba]

1 hour ago, guyxxed said:

This is actually the other thing that always pops to mind when thinking about destroids.  If they can't be made useful, why do they exist at all?

That, of course, being the question that hangs over the Cheyenne II's entire existence.

"Aside from jobbing, why are you even here?"

Macross Frontier materials tell us that the Frontier fleet chose the Cheyenne II for a very specific corner case... air defense inside of the Island ships where the regular air defenses can't reach.  This is seemingly only a concern because the Island Cluster-class emigrant ships are SO HUGE that enemies flying inside the dome without being forced into a virtual trench run by skyscrapers is a realistic concern.  Why they didn't use a more conventional self-propelled anti-aircraft platform like Japan's Type-87 SPAAG is anyone's guess, esp. given that their other defenses include conventional tank destroyers (based on the B1 Centauro).  

(The real-world answer being a cost-save by reusing an existing CG model leftover from Macross Zero.)

 

1 hour ago, guyxxed said:

Yes, plot reasons, as sketchley pointed out, but in a setting with AI as advanced as we've seen and mechanical systems as durable and flexible as has been shown, why is CIWS not an impenetrable defense for just about any ship or fort?  It's already pretty formidable in current real world settings, in Macross it should mean that a fighter can never even get close to an opponent ship unless they fold right next to it.

Because it's based on the same technology, and has the same basic limitations, as real-world anti-aircraft weapons.

Of course, AI is not magic.  What you get out of it is only as good as what you put into it and AI technology in Macross is limited by hardware and by law.

As far as we know, the CIWS systems in Macross are very much like the ones in the real world just with better/more powerful missiles and with particle beam weapons in place of high rate-of-fire solid ammo cannons.  They're using radar and other sensors to identify and track targets, feeding that data to onboard computers to predict trajectories to gain a missile lock or calculate lead time for a gun firing solution.  Much like modern equivalents, these systems can be confused or outright defeated by stealth, speed, or simply flying erratically.

• VFs use a mixture of passive and active stealth measures to diminish the ability of enemy radar to detect them.  This makes it harder for defenses to spot and engage them at range since it takes powerful ECCM to cut through active stealth.
• Red raw speed is an option to defeat many types of tracking systems.  Even though it is normally easy to shoot down a target that is moving in a straight line, you need at least two data points about its location over time to compute an estimated trajectory and speed and plot an intercept based on that.  If the craft or projectile is clear of the sensor's FOV before that second sweep needed to establish speed and directionality, the system cannot track the target and usually writes it off as a false detection.  This was the cause of the 1991 Dhahran barracks disaster during the Gulf War (due to a software bug in Patriot missile systems providing air defense) and is also the working theory behind "uninterceptable" hypersonic missiles that have been talked about in the last few years.
• Flying erratically can also make interception more difficult by making it harder to establish a viable firing solution by simply being difficult to predict.  VFs are quite good at this since they can turn on a proverbial dime by transforming and the ones we see doing most of the AA-dodging are 5th Gen ones that can accelerate and turn beyond the limits of what a human pilot could normally endure thanks to the ISC (Vajra flight performance is as good or even better).  This was one reason that Iraqi scud missiles got through air defenses unusually often.  Modifications made to increase their range made their flight paths erratic and reduced their accuracy, sometimes causing them to tumble or corkscrew through the air.

Combine those as most VFs do, and a kill shot with anti-aircraft guns and missile launchers is far from guaranteed... which is why AA guns need to improve alongside the aircraft themselves.  Even modern AA guns need to put hundreds of rounds in the air (often from multiple guns) for the chance of connecting with just a few of them to score a kill.

Destroid weapon systems work exactly the same way, they're just mounted on a more expensive self-propelled platform.  The center of that particular Venn diagram being that we are told that quite a few of those Cheyenne II's, particularly the ones used on ships like the Macross Quarter, aren't even manned.  They're remotely operated, making them just an overpriced regular AA gun.

From what we're told, modern AA systems c.2058-2059 are mainly designed to counter 4th Gen VF levels of performance and need an update to be able to address the greater performance of a 5th Gen VF or something like a Vajra reliably.  We do see the Frontier fleet's air defenses scoring kills on Vajra at several points in the series, but that's likely as much down to a dense field of overlapping fire as skill or good judgement.

[guyxxed]

As long as it looks cool, I'm down with it.  😉 

First try at a workroid texture.  Some clean up on the arms where the caution lines got distorted, and some of the scrapes and scratches need refined, but overall not too bad, I think.  Along with all the above talk, I have to think even a workroid struggles to find a real application in world.  Other than manhandling Vajra corpses onto a truck, I'm not sure what else they'd be good for.  Poor Cheyenne, the red headed step child of the Macross universe.

[Seto Kaiba]

7 minutes ago, guyxxed said:

As long as it looks cool, I'm down with it.  😉 

First try at a workroid texture.  Some clean up on the arms where the caution lines got distorted, and some of the scrapes and scratches need refined, but overall not too bad, I think. 

Looks pretty good for a first try.  Given what they're used for, honestly the more dinged-up the better IMO.

 

7 minutes ago, guyxxed said:

Along with all the above talk, I have to think even a workroid struggles to find a real application in world.  Other than manhandling Vajra corpses onto a truck, I'm not sure what else they'd be good for.  Poor Cheyenne, the red headed step child of the Macross universe.

Frontier's Destroid Works and Delta's Workroid probably find a lot more use than the military version.

After all, this is basically a cheap piece of multipurpose heavy machinery that can be used for all different kinds of heavy work with modular parts or handheld equipment.  We know from the Macross Frontier TV series and movies that they're used for disaster recovery and cleanup, firefighting, construction, and even mining.  They're spaceworthy and the rollers they have on their feet can be magnetized, so they can be used for repairing ships and space stations from the outside.  The Workroid version is shown to be the world's most OP freight handling machine, able to manhandle multiple 20ft-class ISO storage containers at one time exponentially faster than any crane...

Mining, construction, and demolition is already a pretty huge portfolio for a single multirole machine.  It's basically the equivalent of a Zentradi skilled tradesman without the resource issues of sustaining a population of giants.

[guyxxed]

Definitely get what you're saying, but it seems like the same thing where dedicated machines could do the same jobs more efficiently.  A 9.5m tall robot is super strong and dextrous, but a crane can lift something to the top of a building and be disassembled for storage when it's not needed.  A forklift might be slower than a workroid, but it's also less likely to pulp your cargo spinning and dancing on the way to the loading dock (it's honestly a wonder Freyja was still alive after Hayate's transit 😉).  I'll give you construction, because hands to hold a girder in place while people attach it is better than a crane, but again is going to be limited to a structure only as high as it can reach, so not great for building skyscrapers.

It's all moot, and I'm mostly just being nitpicky for the sake of fun.  Once you have giant robots, I'd use them for everything I possibly could, too, just because it's cool.  To a man with a hammer, all the world's a nail, so why not?  It does raise another another thought in me, though, which is how much are smaller power suit type machines used?  Or humanoid robots in the 1.8 - 2m size?  Not at all that we've seen, but it seems like another obvious extention of the technologies at play and possilby more useful at the same tasks.  A robot drink machine is cool, but a robot firefighter that can go up stairs and rescue soft meat bags from back hallways would be truly useful.

[TG Remix]

On 2/8/2026 at 8:01 PM, Seto Kaiba said:

Destroids as a whole were designed around the idea of fighting a land war in a conventional alien invasion scenario.  Something that just does not happen in Macross.  They're land warfare weapons in a space war setting.  Making it transform would defeat the other key attribute of a Destroid... being cheaper than a Valkyrie so that they can be fielded in larger numbers.  Not that a transforming tank would be any less useless in a space war than a regular non-transforming ground-bound robot.  

By all technicalities, that is what Variable Attackers were designed for.

 

This is Animation - Macross Plus (OVA) goes through extensive detail about the development of them, mainly that VFs as they were weren't cost effective to control areas through the atmosphere, so VAs were designed for ground control like our attacker aircraft today, and most notably states they can replace the role Destroids have in emergencies. So at least in theory they are pretty much the closest things we have to Variable Destroids, even if we only have two of them actually drawn (The VA-3 and Az-130.) Could give them a chance for actual Destroids to be "revived" in a sense as variable craft, if the Destroid Monster can live on through the VB-6, why not?

 

And this isn't to discredit the points Seto made, despite my biases for settings taking place on soil and in the air, Macross is generally space focused. Even when we actually do see the VA-3s in a animated series proper they're used by Zolan pirates in space in 7 Dynamite. This is more for me to rationalize the possibility of more ground focus in the franchise, even if it's minor in the grand scheme of things. 
 

20 hours ago, sketchley said:

That said, one of the "boss" enemies in the Macross M3 game is a PPB equipped Destroid Monster (if memory serves).  That suggests there is the possibility of a low-cost upgrade to Destroids that significantly increases their defensive capabilities (low-cost in the sense that PPB projectors and an upgraded reactor would require less resources than replacing the entire surface with SWAG armour and a much, much higher output reactor.)

In general M3 and VF-X2 were fond of using them as enemies in a variety of factions. In M3 they were mostly used by Zentradi terrorists and at one point Anti-UN insurgents in Belfast hiding in a secret UN base. That and with VF-X2 having Destroids be the garrison of the Ceres Base I'm convinced that they're still around in a small but noticeable amount, be it for the few ground forces like we see with Delta or mothballed units for base defense.

 

16 hours ago, Seto Kaiba said:

Macross Galaxy actually tried modernizing Destroids using VF tech in Macross the Ride and the end result was that it didn't really help. Those improved destroids fared no better because they were ultimately stuck hanging around on the hull of a ship in purely defensive roles waiting for the enemy to come into range. They had no way to take the fight to the enemy, meaning they offered no material advantage over just having beam CIWS systems and missile phalanxes that could do the same job for less money and without the need to put a human operator at risk.

I took the existence of the Super Defenders as a general thing instead of specifically a Macross Galaxy thing, since its described to be used in fleets and immigrant planets in plural.

 

3 hours ago, guyxxed said:

As long as it looks cool, I'm down with it.  😉 

First try at a workroid texture.  Some clean up on the arms where the caution lines got distorted, and some of the scrapes and scratches need refined, but overall not too bad, I think.  Along with all the above talk, I have to think even a workroid struggles to find a real application in world.  Other than manhandling Vajra corpses onto a truck, I'm not sure what else they'd be good for.  Poor Cheyenne, the red headed step child of the Macross universe.

Nerd stuff aside, this looks great! Love the paint scratches since like Seto said, you can get the feeling that these machines have a lot of work experience.

 

3 hours ago, Seto Kaiba said:

Mining, construction, and demolition is already a pretty huge portfolio for a single multirole machine.  It's basically the equivalent of a Zentradi skilled tradesman without the resource issues of sustaining a population of giants.

It's like a trade off in a sense; you either depend on a machine that needs maintenance and someone to train to use, or make yourself bigger to lift things as you are. And if you have a miclone machine you probably don't need to worry about staying that size. 30 funny enough eats both cakes with having a power armor for giants for construction and mining.

 

24 minutes ago, guyxxed said:

It's all moot, and I'm mostly just being nitpicky for the sake of fun.  Once you have giant robots, I'd use them for everything I possibly could, too, just because it's cool.  To a man with a hammer, all the world's a nail, so why not?  It does raise another another thought in me, though, which is how much are smaller power suit type machines used?  Or humanoid robots in the 1.8 - 2m size?  Not at all that we've seen, but it seems like another obvious extention of the technologies at play and possilby more useful at the same tasks.  A robot drink machine is cool, but a robot firefighter that can go up stairs and rescue soft meat bags from back hallways would be truly useful.

It all depends on what you want to focus on in a setting. Want more space or ground focus, that's what your story and worldbuilding will revolve around. Want your giant robots to be more then death machines? Go in the way of Patlabor and find any and all practical usages you can come up with them. And that's the fun thing about Macross, the franchise is so big and expansive they can all be what you want and don't want in a setting all at once!

[guyxxed]

15 minutes ago, TG Remix said:

It all depends on what you want to focus on in a setting. Want more space or ground focus, that's what your story and worldbuilding will revolve around. Want your giant robots to be more then death machines? Go in the way of Patlabor and find any and all practical usages you can come up with them. And that's the fun thing about Macross, the franchise is so big and expansive they can all be what you want and don't want in a setting all at once!

I'm on board with that, and like I said above, I'm not bothered by the awkwardness of workroids or desroids, they're cool additions to the universe, my engineering nerd mind just has to pull at the threads is all.  It's part of the fun!  Thanks for all the input and discussion, nerd stuff is also part of the fun!  😉 

One last one, stripes and colors cleaned up, warning lights in plce, and in a more dynamic pose.  Now, on to the Delta version!