Why not tanks?

[Maddin]

I don't really get the justification for mechs in this game. I mean a mechs advantage is to be more mobile. Part of it would be stuff like strafing and jumping. But at least strafing is not possible and the mech can't even turn 360° but only 90° from its legs, unlike a tank which can turn full 360°.

So I really see no point in which a mech is better in this world than a tank is?

[Shotgun]

There are plenty of regular ground vehicles in the MWO universe lore too. The thing about mechs is that they essentially mimic the motion of the human form, allowing a greater degree of control for just a single pilot connected via neural interface and TrackIR-style technology (except from the future). That's why in MWO lore you can see mechs performing various acrobatic feats and engaging in melee combat that you don't see in the game mainly due to engine limitations.

Also, strafing (in gaming terms) just means moving at a tangent to your target while facing it, which you most definitely can do in this game, as most mechs are capable of torso angles greater than 90 degrees.

[Deckire]

A tank is managed by about crews of 3-5, as such their is much more need of Coordination and if something happens that is also breaking apart more easily. While in conjuction with this makes the Tank far less mobile in that sense, as Orders Movements people commanding turret degrees and so forth, it takes far more time for these contraptions to work properly. Even though they have that 360 and such.

The Advantage of the Mechs is that even though their is more 90 degree twists this is far more to being that of a Single Pilot, and the use of the Neuro Helmet, which connects brainwaves with the mech for balance. This allowed Mechs to be far more active due to having more sense as they handle with a pilots action more quickly as if they were practically your body.

One of the bigger factor is that they Tank in the Battletech Universe were far less armored and structured then that of a 20 Ton Light Mech, having a Armor Breach meant that the entire crew would be practically dead. The only one that seemed to have been extremely effective was the Demolisher in the Star League and Succession Wars, they were far more armored able to take a good beating and had weaponry that shredded through more common mechs in the Light and Medium Category. Even then they were still harder to defend and would have to survive with Number Advantages, over a minor groups.

[Conan the Brobarian]

There's probably some reason in the books but I don't give a ♥♥♥♥. Mechs is more fun than tanks.

[Maddin]

So it is essentially:

1. Tanks need more crew, 1 vs 5-8, which sort of makes sense? I guess? I mean I'm pretty sure you could route a tank to just aim in the same direction with every weapon as well and if you have an auto loader, you can just build it into the tank the same way to bring down number of people controlling it

2. More natural movement for the pilot allowing for faster reaction. I give you this, it does make sense to a degree when the thing is connected to a neural interface and such

3. More armor and stronger weapons. Well this makes no real sense, as you can build more armor and weapons for far cheaper onto a tank than a mech. Like, if I have a mech with 5 centimeter armor, I could most likely build a tank with 10 centimeter armor for the same price and it could move at the same speed.

I'm still salty have not being able to strafe though.

[Nightmare1]

Originally posted by Maddin:

I don't really get the justification for mechs in this game. I mean a mechs advantage is to be more mobile. Part of it would be stuff like strafing and jumping. But at least strafing is not possible and the mech can't even turn 360° but only 90° from its legs, unlike a tank which can turn full 360°.

So I really see no point in which a mech is better in this world than a tank is?

First time interacting with anything from the BattleTech or MechWarrior Universe, eh?

In the Lore, Mechs were more mobile, required less in terms of logistics, had longer operating times, could operate over larger distances, were faster than tanks that could carry similar armaments, could mount Jump Jets, and could be deployed in space on the hulls of Warships.

In the MechWarrior game series, tanks have always been fodder for Mechs, generally speaking. The biggest thing that tanks had going for them, was that they were generally "tanky" (no pun intended and this applies primarily to the main battle tanks only) and offered a more stable firing platform for heavy weapons. The heavier the tank though, the shorter its operational range, making them a more defensive vehicle than an offensive one. Later, four-legged Mechs were developed that offered similar levels of stability for heavy weapon platforms.

In the books, tanks also performed more heavily in urban areas than in non-urban zones. The exception to this rule were the lighter, faster hover tanks that sacrificed firepower and armor for speed and agility, operating like a harassing skirmisher force or scouting party than a regular combat force. This tactic proved very effective against the Clans, as anyone who's read The Blood of Kerensky Trilogy will likely recall.

As for MechWarrior Online though, there are only Mechs because that is how PGI chose to make the game. Other MechWarrior games did indeed have tanks, hovercraft, bombers, helicopters, and even warships that could all be engaged and destroyed.

[Maddin]

Ahh thanks for the lore lesson. I did not even know that there is such a huge lore and entire books behind the game. And good to know that there is actually other stuff in the Universe and it wasn't just decided "We use mechs because mechs are cool" without actually thinking about pros and cons. (I mean I still believe in brute force tanks should be superior but at least they put some thought behind it)

[Ishan451]

From a realistic standpoint there is absolutely no reason to ever build a Battlemech. Battletech finds ways to make it seem plausible within its lore, as outlined by Nightmare, but anything a Battlemech could do you could make a Tank do.

The thing is Battletech's lore is Knights in Space. The idea is to have knight fights with robots, at least at its inception, later it would become more politically motivated, which is why you have situations such as two Commanders agreeing to determine the outcome of a War by dueling each other, while their company of mechs and attached Regiments of Tanks and Infantry pretty much would watch the outcome.


But in our universe, provided there is not gonna be a ruler that totally loves the idea of big, giant Robots, the use of Mechs is a stupid one.

In Warfare you want to avoid detection as much as possible. Marching around in a Battlemech the size of a Building already breaks this rule of warfare.

Then you would also be better off using a spider leg design, as it does allow you better weight distribution compared to using two legs, meaning you could carry more weapons and armor compared to what a two legged design could... having spider legs also means you could make the 'Tank' lower, more easily able to take advantage of the terrain.

And then lastly, of course, you want your Weapon systems to be as uncomplicated as possible. There is a reason why modern tanks still use tracks and don't use Spider legs. Fixing a track, when it busts is a lot easier than fixing a complicated piece of machinery.


Mechs, that are large enough so they do no longer fit into Human dwellings, make absolutely no sense from a realistic perspective...

As construction machinery, yeah (though even those would probably run of 4 to 8 legs, if they don't use tracks)... but even for Space Warfare, you would want them to be able to board the enemy ships.


Unless we develop a civilisation that thinks knights in space is a cool idea, i don't think we'll ever see battlemechs in a serious military context...

Civilian? Sure, they are cool after all.

[Maddin]

Yeah I personally believe smaller battlemechs would be awesome in Urban territories. Give them capabilities to jump around very good and make them small enough to entire buildings, but tanky enough to resist machine gun fire. Now you have the ultimate anti terror, Urban fighting and police unit.

[Ishan451]

Originally posted by Maddin:

Yeah I personally believe smaller battlemechs would be awesome in Urban territories.

They exist in Battletech lore. Protomechs and Battle Armor, by their name. Protomechs are <10ton heavy mechs, and Battle Armor are armored exosuits of about 1ton weight.

[JC]

I think the simple answere is.. Dude it's Sci-fi! You know kinda like how lightsaber block slow moving laser blasts in starwars.. as if they aren't even as fast as a bullet. Things don't need to make sense to be cool and fun!

[Ishan451]

Originally posted by JC:

I think the simple answere is.. Dude it's Sci-fi! You know kinda like how lightsaber block slow moving laser blasts in starwars.. as if they aren't even as fast as a bullet. Things don't need to make sense to be cool and fun!

Except that Star Wars is not Scifi, but a Fairy Tale, and that Battletech is Hard Scifi[en.wikipedia.org] and not soft SciFi, even if most of the scientific concepts it was created on, have been proven to be improbable in the last 3 decades since its inception.

[Maddin]

Yeah star wars is rather some kind of Futuristic Magitech kinda stuff. As they never actually bother to even try to explain concepts. And the whole Jedi thing in Star Wars is what makes it really unlikeable to me. Ohh and how they broke the entire Series with the last movie.

[JC]

Originally posted by Ishan451:

Except that Star Wars is not Scifi, but a Fairy Tale, and that Battletech is Hard Scifi[en.wikipedia.org] and not soft SciFi, even if most of the scientific concepts it was created on, have been proven to be improbable in the last 3 decades since its inception.

And yet Star trek has the most real world apps today... It's still "fiction" no matter how you slice it. Even "the expanse" which is probably one of the most realistic additions to the whole genre still leaves a lot of room for story telling and "magical" things

[Sparrow]

why, for military grade arm wrestling of course :^)

[Ishan451]

Originally posted by Maddin:

Yeah star wars is rather some kind of Futuristic Magitech kinda stuff. As they never actually bother to even try to explain concepts. And the whole Jedi thing in Star Wars is what makes it really unlikeable to me. Ohh and how they broke the entire Series with the last movie.

Honestly, the whole "it arced shots in space" and "bombs falling down on stuff", as jarring as it was that was probably the one thing that can be forgiven given its genre. Of course, a good Fairy Tale doesn't make the listener go "that's ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥"... so it would still be a bad Fairy Tale, but claiming that Star Wars ever was accurate with space would be an overstatement. I mean, in the first movie they (Han, Luke and i believe Leia) are exiting into the vaccum of space without any sort of space gear or breathing apparatuses.

Originally posted by JC:

Even "the expanse" which is probably one of the most realistic additions to the whole genre still leaves a lot of room for story telling and "magical" things

No, it does not. Hard Science Fiction is clearly defined. What you are currently doing is claiming that just because it has elements of something that it is all the same, which it is not.

Just like Fantasy is not just fantasy. There is low magic fantasy, high magic fantasy, historical fantasy, Steam Punk, Diesel Punk, Bio Punk, Cyber Punk.. and with the later categories you can already see where Fantasy is starting to cross over into Science Fiction territory, depending on how accurate something is.

You can have Science Fiction set in the middle ages, and you can have Fantasy with Space Ships and Lightsabers.

Science Fiction also has a lot of sub genres and Battletech is Hard Scifi, which is clearly definied as being realistic. Which is why it was such a big deal when that Hack Weisman wanted to introduce Magic into the Battletech universe and was opposed by his co-creator who vehemently opposed it. The remnants of that exists with the Kells ability to 'disappear'. Fortunately for everyone Weisman ♥♥♥♥♥♥ off after that to go and create Shadowrun where he could have his Magic and Technology. And the HBS Battletech game is a prime example that he never understood the Universe.

What makes Science Fiction into Science Fiction is in its very name. Its a Fiction story rooted in Science.

Don't confuse what is sold as Syfy with Science Fiction. SyFy is a shorthand for "Space Ships and Lasers", because people that just want a random book (or movie) don't want to go and do a literature seminar on learning the big differences of Literary Genres, but there are clear limits as to what you can do and cannot do in Hard Science Fiction genre or it will stop being Hard Science Fiction Genre.

Same reason why Star Wars is not Science Fiction, even if most people on the street would call it that way. From a litary perspective it is a Fairy Tale. Why? Because as anyone that actually works with this knows.. a Fairy Tale starts with a quite telling opening...

They all start with "A long time ago, in a Land far, far away..." and how does Star Wars start?

Exactly... it starts with "A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away....". Star Wars is not science Fiction. Never was, never will be. Its a Fairy Tale. And it has Star Ships and Lasers and all the stuff, but its still just a Fairy Tale.

Originally posted by JC:

And yet Star trek has the most real world apps today...

And while i don't know why you bring up Star Trek now, that is because its Hard Science Fiction (based on the knowledge of 1960s), or at least it was until that abomination of STD rolled around and Vulcans now have Jedi Powers.

Many things Star Trek does today seem silly, because we know better, but at the time of its conception a lot of the ideas were researched in earnesty.. such as Psy powers and the like. At that time all of it was based on research that was being done back in that time.

Of course there are things in there that were stupid even back in the day, but nothing of it is Magic.

And the Expanse, is (although i only saw the first season) also Hard Scifi.


There are a lot of genres under the umbrella of Fiction. You are doing it a disservice calling anything with a Space Ship just Science Fiction, because having a Space Ship is not a hallmark of Science Fiction. There are amazing Science Fiction stories set in the 1800s. Classics such as Twenty Thousand Leagues Under the Sea, just to name an example.