Victory Gundam Discussion [spoilers]

[Crusader]

The visuals aren't completely bad, but there are a few eps where you can tell they didn't put much into the animation. I recall a scene where Chronicle was walking and it looked odd, and there was a scene where Duker's ship got washed over with water and the animation looked still, but the sound effects are there.

Other than that this series is really good. The battles are well done, and thats part of the reason this show appeals to me. The battles in Zeta seemes repetative to me, but never got that feeling whne watching Victory.

Some of the characters are odd. Several BESPA pilots come to mind in that regard.

[edf91]

Originally Posted by 4Tran

I don't think that Victory confirms it one way or the other. Aesthetically, I'd prefer it if she wasn't a newtype; however, as far as I can tell, it's not really all that important.

If the various Super Robot Wars story is accurate in any way, she is considered enhanced human (or artificial Newtype). Even if that is not consider official, with her behavior near the end of the series, she is certainly demonstrating the various behavior of an artificial Newtype. I believe the novels has her undergone the same operation as that "crazy lady" using the big gun MS.

Originally Posted by 4Tran

I'm under the impression that he was trying to sabotage Victory. According to the rumors I've heard, he was given a directive to have battleships appear, but Tomino wanted to have that part of the story take place on Earth. It's suggested that the motorads were a compromise.

Hard to tell with Tomino - everybody was saying he was trying to kill off the Gundam series since ZZ.

Originally Posted by 4Tran

I feel exactly the same way. The only other shows to successfully show the desperation of the final battle are Seed and 08th MS Team, and neither of those do so to the degree that Victory manages to.

I just think it's the era problem - most final battle in UC timeline is like that for the most part - the fight is just to stop the damn battle.

Originally Posted by 4Tran

He's the main reason why Victory is the only Gundam show that has combat choreography I find interesting. Of course, Uso's tactics aren't exactly wise, but at least they look cool.

Again, I see it more has to do with the time it was animated - fights in Zeta and stuff are done way back when people don't really care about various tactics as much.

Originally Posted by 4Tran

Either the people who assigned V2 it's official specs were overly generous, or it's a case of the combat choreographers not realizing the effect of an overwhelming acceleration advantage. Both possibilities are about as equally likely, and they would be consistent with Sunrise's other mistakes of this nature. To my recollection, mobile suits have pretty much never used their speed advantages properly, and V2 was never shown to move that much faster than its contemporaries.

Yes and no, I think to this question because throughout the UC timeline, by the time the series end, the Gundam used by the main character is either underpower or at best the same as the ones used by the bad guys. Besides, the other problem is - even if the MS is fast, can the pilot keep up? Remember Christina's line in 0080 in asking why in the world is Alex so sensitive? It was because the MS itself cannot keep up with Amuro. In this case, I think it probably has more to do with Usso cannot keep up fighting in any faster pace. Besides, if it were faster, it would be like Layzner using V-MAX - I hope V2 can stand the collision if Usso make a mistake and ram into someone

Originally Posted by 4Tran

Not really. The setting and first part of Seed are definitely based on Mobile Suit Gundam, but most of the other similarities are just cosmetic. Destiny, in particular, isn't really similar to any other Gundam show. The only element of note that it takes from other shows is the Four-Stellar progression.

CE timeline more resemble GW in terms of mobile suit's fighting abilities - in GW, a single Gundam can outslaughter a lot of "grunt" units, while in UC timeline, a better MS like Gundam just means you can survive more encounters, or actually have a chance against some godly pilot. And in terms of story, I think others on the net has already dissect the story and find Seed Destiny borrow a lot of basic plot elements of other Gundam series and throw it in Seed Destiny.

[4Tran]

Originally Posted by edf91

If the various Super Robot Wars story is accurate in any way, she is considered enhanced human (or artificial Newtype). Even if that is not consider official, with her behavior near the end of the series, she is certainly demonstrating the various behavior of an artificial Newtype. I believe the novels has her undergone the same operation as that "crazy lady" using the big gun MS.

SRW and the novels don't mean squat, so it still comes down to the series being noncommittal about the issue.

Originally Posted by edf91

Hard to tell with Tomino - everybody was saying he was trying to kill off the Gundam series since ZZ.

It's a much more compelling argument with Victory though. Tomino was at a very low point in his life, and Sunrise pretty much forced him to make another Gundam show at that time.

Originally Posted by edf91

Again, I see it more has to do with the time it was animated - fights in Zeta and stuff are done way back when people don't really care about various tactics as much.

Untrue. There are other mecha shows from around then (or even earlier) with much better choreography than the Gundam shows. Besides, the tactics in Victory aren't all that impressive in themselves either - it's just that the battle scenes have a certain charm to them that most of the other shows don't possess.

Originally Posted by edf91

Yes and no, I think to this question because throughout the UC timeline, by the time the series end, the Gundam used by the main character is either underpower or at best the same as the ones used by the bad guys. Besides, the other problem is - even if the MS is fast, can the pilot keep up? Remember Christina's line in 0080 in asking why in the world is Alex so sensitive? It was because the MS itself cannot keep up with Amuro. In this case, I think it probably has more to do with Usso cannot keep up fighting in any faster pace. Besides, if it were faster, it would be like Layzner using V-MAX - I hope V2 can stand the collision if Usso make a mistake and ram into someone

You're mistaking what kind of advantage that having vastly superior acceleration brings to the table. It's not a matter of faster pacing (whatever that means) or reaction times; it confers a massive advantage in maneuverability, particularly in space battlefields. This massive advantage is never apparent in the show itself.

Originally Posted by edf91

CE timeline more resemble GW in terms of mobile suit's fighting abilities - in GW, a single Gundam can outslaughter a lot of "grunt" units, while in UC timeline, a better MS like Gundam just means you can survive more encounters, or actually have a chance against some godly pilot. And in terms of story, I think others on the net has already dissect the story and find Seed Destiny borrow a lot of basic plot elements of other Gundam series and throw it in Seed Destiny.

Those others are making it up. Unless they're talking about the trivial story points, Destiny is structurally completely different from any other Gundam show. The only things that they really have much in common are also shared with innumerable mecha/shounen action shows.

[edf91]

Originally Posted by 4Tran

SRW and the novels don't mean squat, so it still comes down to the series being noncommittal about the issue.

The anime was pretty vague about it, yes, but if you completely disregard supplement material like novel, you will barely get any answer to some of the unanswered questions in Victory Gundam because most of the times, novels are there to help answer some of those questions.

Originally Posted by 4Tran

It's a much more compelling argument with Victory though. Tomino was at a very low point in his life, and Sunrise pretty much forced him to make another Gundam show at that time.

After watching Ideon, it's hard for me to imagine Tomino trying to kill off the series or people, since Victory Gundam certainly didn't approach the scale of death in Ideon.

Originally Posted by 4Tran

Untrue. There are other mecha shows from around then (or even earlier) with much better choreography than the Gundam shows. Besides, the tactics in Victory aren't all that impressive in themselves either - it's just that the battle scenes have a certain charm to them that most of the other shows don't possess.

I meant it in the context of the fights in the various Gundam series. Usso certainly display a lot of "flair" that other Gundam series, at least early ones, lack.

Originally Posted by 4Tran

You're mistaking what kind of advantage that having vastly superior acceleration brings to the table. It's not a matter of faster pacing (whatever that means) or reaction times; it confers a massive advantage in maneuverability, particularly in space battlefields. This massive advantage is never apparent in the show itself.

Why do you think I bring up Layzner in the discussion? What I mean is that if you are talking about how fast V2 can accelerate, but that's like using MA in a fight - yes, MA can outrun a MS, but in terms of close range movement, MS has the advantage because you can do a lot of small movement quickly. Acceleration doesn't mean much in close range if you cannot change direction quickly, and in order to do that, you need pilot's quick reflexes, and the MS/MA itself to be designed for "all direction" movement. Most MS in V2's era like Psychoframe, as far as I know, so it's all up to the MS's ability and pilot's reflex. What I am saying was I doubt Usso can become even faster, since he's still limited by how his body can take the sudden increase in G. I guess I am saying that I think they kind of hit the wall in terms of MS movement to human control already, so unless they move to psychoframe like technology, MS combat movement at about its maximum potential.

Originally Posted by 4Tran

Those others are making it up. Unless they're talking about the trivial story points, Destiny is structurally completely different from any other Gundam show. The only things that they really have much in common are also shared with innumerable mecha/shounen action shows.

I am talking about particular story element:

1) Stolen Gundam - Zeta Gundam
2) Meeting the enemies pilot, fall in love and unable to stop her death - Zeta Gundam
3) third fraction suddenly appears from nowhere (non-existant in beginning of series) and cause the fight to climax - Zeta Gundam
4) old character appearing in the series to "guide" the main character - Zeta Gundam

Yes, it's very general, that's why I believe most people are saying the creator of Seed Destiny basically those a lot of story elements from Zeta and "incorporate" that into the Seed Destiny story, so for people who watched the old UC Gundam series, they feel so familiar of the story in Seed Destiny. I don't think of it as bad per say - just bad execution (Shinn's character development just sucks near the end - Shinn never seems to mature, while for Camille, at least he seems tolerable to people by the end of the series.)

[4Tran]

Originally Posted by edf91

The anime was pretty vague about it, yes, but if you completely disregard supplement material like novel, you will barely get any answer to some of the unanswered questions in Victory Gundam because most of the times, novels are there to help answer some of those questions.

It's Bandai's policy that only the animated shows are official. And for good reason too, since the novels tend to contradict the parent works so much.

Originally Posted by edf91

After watching Ideon, it's hard for me to imagine Tomino trying to kill off the series or people, since Victory Gundam certainly didn't approach the scale of death in Ideon.

Tomino didn't have full creative control over Victory.

Originally Posted by edf91

Why do you think I bring up Layzner in the discussion? What I mean is that if you are talking about how fast V2 can accelerate, but that's like using MA in a fight - yes, MA can outrun a MS, but in terms of close range movement, MS has the advantage because you can do a lot of small movement quickly. Acceleration doesn't mean much in close range if you cannot change direction quickly, and in order to do that, you need pilot's quick reflexes, and the MS/MA itself to be designed for "all direction" movement. Most MS in V2's era like Psychoframe, as far as I know, so it's all up to the MS's ability and pilot's reflex. What I am saying was I doubt Usso can become even faster, since he's still limited by how his body can take the sudden increase in G. I guess I am saying that I think they kind of hit the wall in terms of MS movement to human control already, so unless they move to psychoframe like technology, MS combat movement at about its maximum potential.

You don't seem to understand that in space, acceleration = maneuverability. There is no such thing as better "close range movement" since superior acceleration absolutely means that you can change direction more quickly (or more accurately, change your vectors and velocity more quickly).

Originally Posted by edf91

1) Stolen Gundam - Zeta Gundam
2) Meeting the enemies pilot, fall in love and unable to stop her death - Zeta Gundam
3) third fraction suddenly appears from nowhere (non-existant in beginning of series) and cause the fight to climax - Zeta Gundam
4) old character appearing in the series to "guide" the main character - Zeta Gundam

Is that really the best you can do?

Originally Posted by edf91

Yes, it's very general, that's why I believe most people are saying the creator of Seed Destiny basically those a lot of story elements from Zeta and "incorporate" that into the Seed Destiny story, so for people who watched the old UC Gundam series, they feel so familiar of the story in Seed Destiny. I don't think of it as bad per say - just bad execution (Shinn's character development just sucks near the end - Shinn never seems to mature, while for Camille, at least he seems tolerable to people by the end of the series.)

That's pretty much missing the forest for the trees.

[edf91]

Originally Posted by 4Tran

It's Bandai's policy that only the animated shows are official. And for good reason too, since the novels tend to contradict the parent works so much.

Not all the time - Gundam Sentinels are consider canon UC timeline story, and it has not been animated yet. And what happen to Mineva at the end of Zeta was never shown in the anime at all (we just know she is a fake by the end of ZZ), but in the old PS1 Zeta Gundam game, they show that Char is the one that rescue her, therefore forcing Haman to use a fake in ZZ. So I guess that is not official material either? Victory Gundam isn't a very popular era in UC timeline (hint - look at how many MG/PG model kits are in that era), so trying to find good official material on it is slim to none, as typical Gundam fans don't give a rat's behind on whether Katejina is a Newtype or what not, and doubt Bandai/Sunrise will feel a need to explain that.

If you do not believe she is a newtype or artificial Newtype, how in the world can Katejina become a pilot, a pretty good one at that, so quick? It is a common theme throughout the Gundam series that unless you are in the military and went through official training, regular people just cannot become a good MS pilot, at least not in such a short period of time, unless they are either Newtype or artificial Newtype. Yes, most of the "kids" that end up piloting are consider Newtype (Odeo's girlfriend/potential girl friend noticed Odeo's death way before it become official, so unless both side have some Newtype ability, it is usually not possible for them to sense others.).

Originally Posted by 4Tran

Tomino didn't have full creative control over Victory.

I am not going to argue this one, simply because I don't want to do research on the subject - Tomino rarely does a show if he doesn't have a lot of control over the show, at least to my understanding. And I have to agree that Tomino's thoughts have been dark since the Zeta/Ideon days - until Brain Powerd/Turn A era, most of Tomino's series have pretty dark tone/theme.

Originally Posted by 4Tran

You don't seem to understand that in space, acceleration = maneuverability. There is no such thing as better "close range movement" since superior acceleration absolutely means that you can change direction more quickly (or more accurately, change your vectors and velocity more quickly).

So you are saying a MS that look like a missile is probably the most maneuverable object in space then? Unless you are talking about ultra long range shot that you have no real defense against, most MS fights in UC era is medium to short range, so you are saying as long as you can go fast like a missile, then nothing can hit you, and you can hit others? Think back to the original Gundam - I assume regular planes can probably fly faster than a MS in space, so if the plane is more maneuverable than a MS, why isn't planes replacing the MS in most battles?

Maybe it's because I lack common sense, all I know is when I play various MS "simulation" games, I know I hate using GP03D because even though it move fast, but when you are trying to do a tight turn or something similiar, you have to slow down, as the MA/MS lack side tons of side vernier to make none-straight forward movement difficult and slow.

Originally Posted by 4Tran

Is that really the best you can do?

If you only consider "line by line" or "straight copy" as borrowing ideas, then I have nothing to say - our thoughts are like parallel lines that never meets. I am sure we have all read various authors that discuss their stories have various elements that are "inspired" by other people's work. At times, they can be subtle so for most people, it would be hard to pick up on (meaning the elements are original). I am just talking about those lines, and apparently, you are not.

[4Tran]

Originally Posted by edf91

<SNIP> typical Gundam fans don't give a rat's behind on whether Katejina is a Newtype or what not, and doubt Bandai/Sunrise will feel a need to explain that.

And that's the situation in a nutshell.

Originally Posted by edf91

So you are saying a MS that look like a missile is probably the most maneuverable object in space then? Unless you are talking about ultra long range shot that you have no real defense against, most MS fights in UC era is medium to short range, so you are saying as long as you can go fast like a missile, then nothing can hit you, and you can hit others?

Why would the shape of the space vehicle make any difference on its acceleration or maneuverability? The reason that there's a difference between acceleration and maneuverability on Earth has to do with the way vehicles interact with the medium - the direction of travel is dictated by the vehicle's facing. In space, the two operate independently of one another, and turning is relatively trivial, so acceleration becomes the most important factor of maneuverability. This isn't an intuitive concept, so it's not surprising that most animators get it wrong.

Originally Posted by edf91

Think back to the original Gundam - I assume regular planes can probably fly faster than a MS in space, so if the plane is more maneuverable than a MS, why isn't planes replacing the MS in most battles?

That's because the combat in Gundam shows isn't even slightly realistic.

Originally Posted by edf91

Maybe it's because I lack common sense, all I know is when I play various MS "simulation" games, I know I hate using GP03D because even though it move fast, but when you are trying to do a tight turn or something similiar, you have to slow down, as the MA/MS lack side tons of side vernier to make none-straight forward movement difficult and slow.

None of the Gundam games model space combat very well.

Originally Posted by edf91

If you only consider "line by line" or "straight copy" as borrowing ideas, then I have nothing to say - our thoughts are like parallel lines that never meets. I am sure we have all read various authors that discuss their stories have various elements that are "inspired" by other people's work. At times, they can be subtle so for most people, it would be hard to pick up on (meaning the elements are original). I am just talking about those lines, and apparently, you are not.

It's not a question of whether one element is a "straight copy" of another one. It's that, of the four points you brought up, three of them are so vague that they can apply to all sorts of other shows. Moreover, they tie in far closer to Gundam Seed than to Zeta.

[edf91]

Originally Posted by 4Tran

Why would the shape of the space vehicle make any difference on its acceleration or maneuverability? The reason that there's a difference between acceleration and maneuverability on Earth has to do with the way vehicles interact with the medium - the direction of travel is dictated by the vehicle's facing. In space, the two operate independently of one another, and turning is relatively trivial, so acceleration becomes the most important factor of maneuverability. This isn't an intuitive concept, so it's not surprising that most animators get it wrong.

Of course it does - in space, the only way you can CHANGE direction in the way you move is by using thruster in the opposite direction. In order to avoid being shot at, you need good ability to change directions. A missile, by design, have all the main thrusters at the back, so you can move in the forward direction faster. Not saying it cannot move sideway, but it's sideway movement aren't very good or mobile. Every try to turn a car when you are moving fast? Your momentum will move you forward when you are turning in another direction, so in space, you need to apply some decent sideway acceleration in order to do a smooth turn. Most MS design, including V2, has the main thrusters on the back, so yes, V2 can move forward very quick, but its sideway movement is still relatively speaking limited by its side thrusters, so when in typical "dogfights", V2 will need to slow down if it wants to do tight turns or change directions.

Originally Posted by 4Tran

That's because the combat in Gundam shows isn't even slightly realistic.

Common sense still applies - just how often they applies is up to the discretion of the show creators

Originally Posted by 4Tran

None of the Gundam games model space combat very well.

Model correctly, yes, but the general concept is the same.

Originally Posted by 4Tran

It's not a question of whether one element is a "straight copy" of another one. It's that, of the four points you brought up, three of them are so vague that they can apply to all sorts of other shows. Moreover, they tie in far closer to Gundam Seed than to Zeta.

I think I get what you are saying - it is just the general feeling many of the old school UC Gundam fan feels when we watched Seed Destiny. I know I didn't read other people's reaction when I watch the show, and those points just kind of "pop up" in my head. It's not as if I decide to nitpick the show. I guess it's all the Super Robot feel that piss us off

[4Tran]

Originally Posted by edf91

Of course it does - in space, the only way you can CHANGE direction in the way you move is by using thruster in the opposite direction.

Incorrect. In space, there are two types of directions: facing and heading. One changes facing by rotating the vehicle - a trivial task compared to actually accelerating it to any degree. One changes heading by applying thrust in any direction other than that directly opposite the current heading.

Originally Posted by edf91

In order to avoid being shot at, you need good ability to change directions. A missile, by design, have all the main thrusters at the back, so you can move in the forward direction faster. Not saying it cannot move sideway, but it's sideway movement aren't very good or mobile.

You're incorrect on both points. First off, the shape of a missile is designed to maximize performance in an atmosphere, so this same shape is unnecessary in space. Second, anti-air missiles are actually much more maneuverable than aircraft are.

Originally Posted by edf91

Every try to turn a car when you are moving fast? Your momentum will move you forward when you are turning in another direction, so in space, you need to apply some decent sideway acceleration in order to do a smooth turn.

However, cars don't even behave like spacecraft at all. Intuitively, the faster you're going, the harder it is to turn (in the sense of changing one's facing). But velocity is irrelevant when you've got no medium to contend with, so spacecraft can turn at full efficiency no matter how fast it is going.

Originally Posted by edf91

Most MS design, including V2, has the main thrusters on the back, so yes, V2 can move forward very quick, but its sideway movement is still relatively speaking limited by its side thrusters, so when in typical "dogfights", V2 will need to slow down if it wants to do tight turns or change directions.

That isn't true at all. A space vehicle's turning radius is effectively 0 no matter how fast it is going. However, a vehicle with higher acceleration can generally do so quicker than one with lower acceleration.

Originally Posted by edf91

Common sense still applies - just how often they applies is up to the discretion of the show creators

I suppose the Gundam creators use common sense; unfortunately, it's an especially bad idea to do so when they're dealing with counter-intuitive concepts.

[edf91]

Originally Posted by 4Tran

Incorrect. In space, there are two types of directions: facing and heading. One changes facing by rotating the vehicle - a trivial task compared to actually accelerating it to any degree. One changes heading by applying thrust in any direction other than that directly opposite the current heading.

See my point lower below - I am having a difficult time understanding how a space vechicle can turn without using additional thruster, especially for 90 degree+ turns.

Originally Posted by 4Tran

You're incorrect on both points. First off, the shape of a missile is designed to maximize performance in an atmosphere, so this same shape is unnecessary in space. Second, anti-air missiles are actually much more maneuverable than aircraft are.

I am talking about the thruster configuration, not the general shape of the missile.

Originally Posted by 4Tran

However, cars don't even behave like spacecraft at all. Intuitively, the faster you're going, the harder it is to turn (in the sense of changing one's facing). But velocity is irrelevant when you've got no medium to contend with, so spacecraft can turn at full efficiency no matter how fast it is going.

So you are saying centripetal force don't apply in space then?

Originally Posted by 4Tran

That isn't true at all. A space vehicle's turning radius is effectively 0 no matter how fast it is going. However, a vehicle with higher acceleration can generally do so quicker than one with lower acceleration.

I understand the point you are trying to make, but the question I have is - how can a space vehicle turn its body? From my understanding, you have to use some sort of vernier or thruster on the side to do that, correct? If so, wouldn't how fast you can turn the body depend on how much thrust you have on the side, not to mention the counter-thrust to make sure you don't turn too much?

Originally Posted by 4Tran

I suppose the Gundam creators use common sense; unfortunately, it's an especially bad idea to do so when they're dealing with counter-intuitive concepts.

But they still have to deal with people's perception of them - Yes, viewer want to suspend their common sense at entertainment, but you can only suspend so many of their beliefs before they think you are off your bonkers

[4Tran]

Originally Posted by edf91

See my point lower below - I am having a difficult time understanding how a space vechicle can turn without using additional thruster, especially for 90 degree+ turns.

"Turning" is a very ambiguous term to use since it means one thing in terrestrial environments and something quite different in space. The most efficient way to do it in space is to first rotate one's heading and then apply full thrust in the vector you're aiming for.

Originally Posted by edf91

I am talking about the thruster configuration, not the general shape of the missile.

Then why would the thrusters have to be postion on a space vehicle the way they are on a missile? As long as they can all be pointed in the same direction, they'd still generate the same amount of thrust.

Originally Posted by edf91

So you are saying centripetal force don't apply in space then?

Centripetal force does exist. However, it has no effect when it comes to changing a space vehicle's facing. (I've really got to stop using the word "turn")

Originally Posted by edf91

I understand the point you are trying to make, but the question I have is - how can a space vehicle turn its body? From my understanding, you have to use some sort of vernier or thruster on the side to do that, correct? If so, wouldn't how fast you can turn the body depend on how much thrust you have on the side, not to mention the counter-thrust to make sure you don't turn too much?

Not quite. A vernier can only generate a small portion of a vehicle's total thrust. It'd be more efficient to rotate first, then apply all the thrusters. And since any off-center thrust can generate rotation, there isn't really any need for dedicated verniers for that purpose. Applying a 1g acceleration to a 18m vehicle, for both thrust and counter-thrust, can finish a 180-degree heading change in less than half a second.

Originally Posted by edf91

But they still have to deal with people's perception of them - Yes, viewer want to suspend their common sense at entertainment, but you can only suspend so many of their beliefs before they think you are off your bonkers

What difference would that make? We already know that the Gundam creators weren't trying for realism to begin with. Sure a few elements were pretty good, but the bulk of it is strictly fantasy. The only thing that they managed to do was to deceive some of the audience.

[edf91]

Originally Posted by 4Tran

"Turning" is a very ambiguous term to use since it means one thing in terrestrial environments and something quite different in space. The most efficient way to do it in space is to first rotate one's heading and then apply full thrust in the vector you're aiming for.

Centripetal force does exist. However, it has no effect when it comes to changing a space vehicle's facing. (I've really got to stop using the word "turn")

Not quite. A vernier can only generate a small portion of a vehicle's total thrust. It'd be more efficient to rotate first, then apply all the thrusters. And since any off-center thrust can generate rotation, there isn't really any need for dedicated verniers for that purpose. Applying a 1g acceleration to a 18m vehicle, for both thrust and counter-thrust, can finish a 180-degree heading change in less than half a second.

I think the main problem I having with your explanation (which make sense, btw) is this - if it is so easy to change direction in space, provided you have acceleration, why is almost all science fiction with big rocks falling in space, it is nearly impossible to move them out of earth's way? If it's all about acceleration, just hook up jet engine to the rock, turn and off you go...

Originally Posted by 4Tran

Then why would the thrusters have to be postion on a space vehicle the way they are on a missile? As long as they can all be pointed in the same direction, they'd still generate the same amount of thrust.

I think this is just a misunderstanding - I am basically just calling the thruster configuration in which they all face the same direction and you cannot really move them as the "missile" configuration, since it is the most obvious example I can think of. MS, in most cases, have supplement thrusters on its feet so it can face in another direction, and it's something a missile cannot really do, so it can move in another direction without having to move its main thrusters to redirect itself.

Originally Posted by 4Tran

What difference would that make? We already know that the Gundam creators weren't trying for realism to begin with. Sure a few elements were pretty good, but the bulk of it is strictly fantasy. The only thing that they managed to do was to deceive some of the audience.

I know, but you are making it like a "all or nothing" system - meaning I have to completely give up all common sense in order to watch a series like Gundam, and that I cannot just accept some aspects of the show that might go against my knowledge? Usually a show has to give us some sort of reason/explanation before we can suspend some of our belief system, and I think Gundam in general did a pretty good job of trying to offer some sort of explanation. Wouldn't you agree that it's easier for viewers to "believe" in a show if it doesn't have too much stuff that go against our beliefs?

[4Tran]

Originally Posted by edf91

I think the main problem I having with your explanation (which make sense, btw) is this - if it is so easy to change direction in space, provided you have acceleration, why is almost all science fiction with big rocks falling in space, it is nearly impossible to move them out of earth's way? If it's all about acceleration, just hook up jet engine to the rock, turn and off you go...

Actually, that would be a very good way of dealing with asteroids provided that one could generate enough thrust, the asteroid wasn't too massive, the rockets (you can't use jets for this) had sufficient fuel, one had the appropriate technology, and the time to impact was far enough off. However, in most stories, time, mass and technology are constrained so as to increase the tension. If the thrust is very small compared to the object's current momentum, then it's very difficult to affect its velocity. By the same token, it's possible for an astronaut to move tons of material in zero-g, but it isn't very safe to do so because it takes him too long to apply enough force to overcome the load's momentum.

In real life, this technology is far beyond our means, so we are looking at alternatives - right now, we can detect NOEs, but can't do anything about them yet.

Originally Posted by edf91

I think this is just a misunderstanding - I am basically just calling the thruster configuration in which they all face the same direction and you cannot really move them as the "missile" configuration, since it is the most obvious example I can think of. MS, in most cases, have supplement thrusters on its feet so it can face in another direction, and it's something a missile cannot really do, so it can move in another direction without having to move its main thrusters to redirect itself.

This makes sense since thrusters at the extremities can generate off-center thrust more easily and allows for finer control in non-combat situations. In combat situations, I'd expect the main thrusters to do the majority of the heavy lifting.

Originally Posted by edf91

I know, but you are making it like a "all or nothing" system - meaning I have to completely give up all common sense in order to watch a series like Gundam, and that I cannot just accept some aspects of the show that might go against my knowledge? Usually a show has to give us some sort of reason/explanation before we can suspend some of our belief system, and I think Gundam in general did a pretty good job of trying to offer some sort of explanation. Wouldn't you agree that it's easier for viewers to "believe" in a show if it doesn't have too much stuff that go against our beliefs?

No. If a show is trying to be realistic, then it should strive to be as realistic as possible. In every audience, there will be people with vary degrees of experience, so I think it's sort of foolish to make a show more palatable by catering to the majority's ignorance.

I don't have a problem with shows that try to be realistic, and failing, or shows that don't try for realism at all. However, someone trying to rationalize sheer fantasy as "realistic" is something altogether different. When that happens, we end up with people thinking that Hollywood action movies are realistic depictions of war. I'd prefer it if the creators didn't try explaining certain elements at all.

[edf91]

Originally Posted by 4Tran

Actually, that would be a very good way of dealing with asteroids provided that one could generate enough thrust, the asteroid wasn't too massive, the rockets (you can't use jets for this) had sufficient fuel, one had the appropriate technology, and the time to impact was far enough off. However, in most stories, time, mass and technology are constrained so as to increase the tension. If the thrust is very small compared to the object's current momentum, then it's very difficult to affect its velocity. By the same token, it's possible for an astronaut to move tons of material in zero-g, but it isn't very safe to do so because it takes him too long to apply enough force to overcome the load's momentum.

This make me think - if thrust is everything, does the space vehicle experience the tremendous G forces that planes or cars experience on Earth? I just cannot help but think unless they got good shock absorption system, the MS pilot is going to be crushed into pieces when they accelerate and change direction all the time...

Originally Posted by 4Tran

In real life, this technology is far beyond our means, so we are looking at alternatives - right now, we can detect NOEs, but can't do anything about them yet.

We can always do what that movie does - send a nuke up

Originally Posted by 4Tran

This makes sense since thrusters at the extremities can generate off-center thrust more easily and allows for finer control in non-combat situations. In combat situations, I'd expect the main thrusters to do the majority of the heavy lifting.

Never doubted it - but I am just saying I cannot see a combat vehicle don't have some sort of side thruster/vernier to make it move better. For example, GP03D - I just don't see it as a "agile" MS/MA, as its thruster configuration seems to suggest its better suited for hit and run type of strategy instead of the usual trying to stay in relatively close range and shoot each other out.

Originally Posted by 4Tran

No. If a show is trying to be realistic, then it should strive to be as realistic as possible. In every audience, there will be people with vary degrees of experience, so I think it's sort of foolish to make a show more palatable by catering to the majority's ignorance.

I don't have a problem with shows that try to be realistic, and failing, or shows that don't try for realism at all. However, someone trying to rationalize sheer fantasy as "realistic" is something altogether different. When that happens, we end up with people thinking that Hollywood action movies are realistic depictions of war. I'd prefer it if the creators didn't try explaining certain elements at all.

I understand what you are trying to say - I am not saying we should believe what we see in anime, I guess I am just expecting the creators do their homework so for the stuff they show, they are based on real world physics or what not. If they can create the basic design of a helicopter a couple of hundred years before it is actually created, I am willing to believe some of the stuff in anime might actually happen. It certainly is better than reading about political news

[4Tran]

Originally Posted by edf91

This make me think - if thrust is everything, does the space vehicle experience the tremendous G forces that planes or cars experience on Earth? I just cannot help but think unless they got good shock absorption system, the MS pilot is going to be crushed into pieces when they accelerate and change direction all the time...

In space, a pilot will experience similar g-forces as a driver or an aircraft pilot: linear acceleration and centripetal forces. However, the proportion of these will be very different. In space, centripetal forces will only be generated while a vehicle is rotating - since they can do so so quickly, this would only be transient, so it wouldn't affect the pilot too much. Linear acceleration would be more common, but most cockpits/flightsuits would be designed to make it as comfortable as possible. The greatest danger to pilots would be blackouts and redouts, just like with real pilots.

Originally Posted by edf91

We can always do what that movie does - send a nuke up

It's too bad that we don't have any launch vehicles capable of delivering nuclear weapons to any height greater than NEO. Besides, an uncontrolled nuclear explosion isn't going to do much to the larger asteroids.

Originally Posted by edf91

Never doubted it - but I am just saying I cannot see a combat vehicle don't have some sort of side thruster/vernier to make it move better. For example, GP03D - I just don't see it as a "agile" MS/MA, as its thruster configuration seems to suggest its better suited for hit and run type of strategy instead of the usual trying to stay in relatively close range and shoot each other out.

That's because it's not intuitive for a seemingly large vehicle to be agile.

Originally Posted by edf91

I understand what you are trying to say - I am not saying we should believe what we see in anime, I guess I am just expecting the creators do their homework so for the stuff they show, they are based on real world physics or what not. If they can create the basic design of a helicopter a couple of hundred years before it is actually created, I am willing to believe some of the stuff in anime might actually happen. It certainly is better than reading about political news

The problem is that they don't tend to try making Gundam shows realistic to begin with. A lot of anime might showcase interesting or thoughtful technologies, but the Gundam franchise isn't really one of these. It has a few interesting ideas like the space colonies and other designs like mass drivers, but in the end, it's more likely to give viewers a false impression of what's either feasible or likely. In a way, this is one of the reasons why I tend to like Victory - all of its technologies are obviously either pure fantasy or just plain goofy, and nobody tries to "interpret" them as anything but that.

[Kikuchi]

I've been watching Victory recently, I'm up to episode 36.
I know that Tomino was depressed and all at that time, but WTH ?

This series is just too horrible for words. Corps litteraly pile up, main char is a kid haunted by Murphy's Law, every new thing seems to be done for the sole purpose of more drama.

Like in around episode 30, when

Spoiler for Around ep 30:

The Victory 2 core fighter system seemed to be here only so that they have a "good" way to kill Oliver. Who just got married, yay for the bride.

Ep 26-27 was also quite the shocker, when everyone on the Reinforce asked a little kid to

Spoiler for Ep 26-27:

uses the big cannon, blowing thousands (ten/hundred thousand ?) people in the process.

Episode 36, which I just finished watched also left me in shock.

Spoiler for Ep 36:

I knew that Uso's mother was gonna kick the bucket, you could totally see it coming. But did they seriously had to make her loses her head, so that her son could pick up ? o_O
And she died litteraly SECONDS before the white flag was raised. PLEASE.

I don't hate the series or anything, I'm having a good time watching it. But they totally overdid the drama. I'm bracing myself for the last episodes.

And while I'm at it, I may as well adress a well-deserved red card to Hero-Legends. Like when I watched Turn A last summer, they're the only ones who released the whole series. But their translation work is equally as bad.
To quote myself, 6 months ago on the Turn-A topic :

The translator knew what he was talking about (the story, the characters, the suits) but definitely didn't had much knowledge of the japanese language. There are incredibly big screw-ups in almost every - if not EVERY - episode, with a lot a dialogue being totally made up.

Since they used softsubs, I'm just disabling it. I can't recommand H-L to anyone. Unless you think that getting a general grasp of the story (which is totally possible, the guy KNEW the series) is enough or are desperate to watch Victory, you're better off waiting for the Shinsen&Anime-Gundam joint to be done.

[elindir]

I've just started watching Victory Gundam. I'm watching the series in a chronological order, so the last one I saw before was F91. It's a bit odd for me that Victory is set so far from the One Year Far and the well-known characters. I have only watched 4 episodes, I think, but I would have never guessed that this series is set in U.C. if I wasn't told.

I've read that many people consider this show the second best Gundam series after Zeta. Is this actually true? Did you like Victory Gundam?

[RX-78GP04G Gerbera]

I thought Victory Gundam was very well-done.

Sure it's a bit depressing and even darker than Zeta with all the death and everything as the series progresses (influenced by Tomino at the time), but with how chaotic the times were by then, it's really no surprise. I also feel the deaths help move the story along and help character development. Like various series' before it, Victory has a bunch of inexperienced kids learning the harsh realities of war and maturing bit by bit and developing in their own way; some good and some bad.

And like Zeon long before it, you also see how some of Zanscare's people aren't nearly as bad as their image is portrayed thanks to the more corrupt/power-hungry/insane individuals we may see.


The Mobile Suits were great designs; simpler than before, but still powerful, yet still balanced and in synch with the times. At least the League Militaire's and Zanscare's are. The Federation still uses MS and ships from 30+ years before (similar to F91) and still use the Salamis Kai, which was used since the OWY and the Clop and Ra Cailum class from 60+ years before. Then again, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Though it could also be due to the Federation's further stagnation.

74 years since MSG after all. (And 80 or so years since the invention of the Mobile Suit in general). A LOT can change in such a time, just like in real life. Hasn't even been 100 years since WWI (and only 106 or so years since the airplane was invented) and look at how vastly far the world has come since then.

The battles are also very nicely done and no MS is nearly invincible at all and capable of being defeated in some way; a trait that I like about the Universal Century series' (and a couple AUs like G Gundam, Gundam X, and Turn A Gundam).

And the Federation has little to no real power as you can see. And thanks to the Zanscare Empire, and perhaps because of past experiences with things like the Crossbone Vanguard, Mars Zeon, the Jupiter Empire, etc, space hasn't exactly been the "ideal" living location either. (With illegal space immigrants on Earth and all.)

[4Tran]

Originally Posted by Kikuchi

I've been watching Victory recently, I'm up to episode 36.
I know that Tomino was depressed and all at that time, but WTH ?

This series is just too horrible for words. Corps litteraly pile up, main char is a kid haunted by Murphy's Law, every new thing seems to be done for the sole purpose of more drama.

There's a fair bit of truth to what you point out, and it is a major reason why a lot of people don't like Victory all that much (Tomino included!). I like Victory a fair bit myself, but that was more in spite of the deaths than because of it. It really should be held up as an example of how more characters dying != a better show.

On the other hand, I find that watching the whole show will make it easier to grasp how good (or bad) it is.

Originally Posted by elindir

I've just started watching Victory Gundam. I'm watching the series in a chronological order, so the last one I saw before was F91. It's a bit odd for me that Victory is set so far from the One Year Far and the well-known characters. I have only watched 4 episodes, I think, but I would have never guessed that this series is set in U.C. if I wasn't told.

There's just about nothing connecting Victory to any of the other UC shows. I think that this is a reason why Sunrise decided to go ahead with different Gundam universes for their later TV shows - it really doesn't make that much difference.

Originally Posted by elindir

I've read that many people consider this show the second best Gundam series after Zeta. Is this actually true? Did you like Victory Gundam?

Victory is probably one of the most disliked of all the Gundam shows; even Gundam X and ZZ are more well-liked. If we count Japan, then the one considered the best is Mobile Suit Gundam, with Zeta coming in second. On the other hand, Victory is my favorite Gundam TV show. It has two elements that I find all too rare in the Gundam franchise: good combat choreography, and good character interactions. Couple those with some of the very nice set pieces later on, and I think that Victory doesn't get anywhere near the kudos it deserves.

By the way, the early part of Victory doesn't really have all that much personality. It picks up for most viewers after they get to space.

Originally Posted by RX-78GP04G Gerbera

The Mobile Suits were great designs; simpler than before, but still powerful, yet still balanced and in synch with the times. At least the League Militaire's and Zanscare's are.

I thought that the mobile suit designs in Victory were pretty good. In looks, they had a lot more flavor than many other designs, and they were often well-employed to boot. Why the heck don't we seen stuff like Zoloats kicking butt any more?

Originally Posted by RX-78GP04G Gerbera

The Federation still uses MS and ships from 30+ years before (similar to F91) and still use the Salamis Kai, which was used since the OWY and the Clop and Ra Cailum class from 60+ years before. Then again, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Though it could also be due to the Federation's further stagnation.

The depiction of the Federation is probably one of Victory's weakest points. While it's supposedly one of the most powerful factions (if not definitely the most powerful), it's barely talked about except in passing. We barely learn anything about how it works and all.

Originally Posted by RX-78GP04G Gerbera

The battles are also very nicely done and no MS is nearly invincible at all and capable of being defeated in some way; a trait that I like about the Universal Century series' (and a couple AUs like G Gundam, Gundam X, and Turn A Gundam).

Technically, there was one pilot and mobile suit combo that was just about unstoppable save for plot devices; it's just not an obvious candidate.

[RX-78GP04G Gerbera]

1.) There's still quite a bit connecting Victory to the past UC series'...at least considering the 60 year gap of canon animation XD ("Gundam", Salamis Kai, Clop, Ra Cailum, etc).

2.) One can't forget that the Federation was going downhill ever since as early as 0083 and Zeta Gundam, and only continued to fall due to stagnation, corruption, greed, fear, laziness, arrogance, etc, etc in ZZ, CCA, and F91. So 70+ years later of continuous stagnation will usually cause even the previously mightiest organizations to almost fall off the map.

Also due to the fact that we only see 1 small section of the Federation assisting the League Militaire and not until later in the series.

And it's worse for businesses too like Anaheim Electronics. That business has been THE largest MS business (shorty after the OYW when Zeonic Company, Zeon's primary MS developer, was absorbed by it); developing MS for both sides of each conflict that arose. But shortly before F91, early UC 0100s, their loss of business from the Federation due to their newly installed SNRI branch and the F90 series caused them to practically fall off the map from the monopoly they were. You barely hear them mentioned in Victory either and they were the ones who are said to have helped produce the Victory, Victory 2, and other League Militaire MS.

3.) Well, I mostly just mean in Victory Gundam that there's really no "all-powerful" or "invincible" MS. Even the Victory/Victory 2 are fallible. And I only said a few AUs. Ones like Wing, SEED, and SEED Destiny aren't among them XD.