Thread: MS igloo
View Single Post
Old 2006-01-27, 05:46   Link #27
servitude
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Well mobile armours were fantastic things actually. In UC they're actually feared because a) BIG b) FAST c) Heavier weapons.

Still the tank would have done well as a support piece. One shot from its AP rounds ripped an MS straight. Couple of those could do well in defending or LR engagement. Especially since they have the combat data from the test mission.

But alas.. I guess its much easier to train a MS pilot than a tank driver. After all MS mimics human movement so you could imagine it in your head and use the controls appropriately where as a tank is a tank. You have to think like a tank to do well in it...

Still I'm never in favour of military might based on small nimble units. They're a liability in the middle of extreme fighting. Much like how the Stryker, trumped by the Pentagon as being "THE" frontline FV of the next generation. The Stryker is wheeled..... THe Stryker can't fire its main cannon while moving.. The Stryker is not heavily armoured. The Stryker has a narrow and tall body for its weight....

I would have prefered a mix of tracked and wheeled. The Strker is good and serves the role of recon, low intensity conflict, patrol.. But not as a frontline FV.
servitude is offline   Reply With Quote