Why is gundam leaning toward the "godly" type?

[4Tran]

Originally Posted by Elluh

Anybody think that its a little weird that ZAFT was able to equal the Earth Alliance?

I know that ZAFT has as many resources as the Earth Alliance does,but this is another reason of why I like UC over CE.

ZAFT should not have been able to go on as long as it did for the simple fact that they didn't have the man power(Compared to their being over a billion people on Earth).

It's not particularly weird at all. History is replete with examples of small nations defeating much larger neighbors.

Originally Posted by brightman

This isn't necessarily unrealistic though, as better technology has pretty much always equaled victory prior to the 20th century, though nowadays it doesn't mean jacked.

Actually, technological differences in weaponry are more pronounced, and their effects are more pronounced than any point in history. Technological advantages have often translated to decisive battlefield advantages in the past, but not to the degree that modern militaries (i.e. the U.S.) enjoy. Currently, a first world power can crush a second or third world power's military with relative impunity, provided that the limitations of power projection and logistics are glossed over.

Originally Posted by Elluh

I personally still don't see how a Nation with what was it,10-100 million residents could successfully fight two major Wars within two years,and basically show mo signs of suffering at all.It's not like they even gave the Earth Alliance a chance

There are three main reasons that a country suffers from a war:
1. Long term wars drain a country's economy and saps the morale of the population.
2. Destruction of infrastructure.
3. Loss of manpower through military and civilian casualties.

Orb wasn't really at war for very long; both wars put together would probably only come up to a total of one year at war. It suffered significant infrastructural losses in the first war, but insignificant losses in the second. And the number of casualties suffered was relatively low throughout. Orb was in excellent infrastructural and economic shape at the beginning of both wars, so it wouldn't have been that hard to recover from them. If you want a real world example, the U.S. has been at war since 2002, but there are very little signs of it suffering from it.

Originally Posted by Paininator

They'd have to carry a LOT of fuel in order to stay in the air, and maneuver in the air.

That's true to a degree, but it's going to also depend on how fast the exhaust vents out. The faster the exhaust, the less fuel is consumed.

[brolycjw]

Originally Posted by 4Tran

When did this happen, and what's the point of bringing it up?

Because you said it only did enough damage to shake the pilot, but it managed to damage the gundam directly. It happened in the second fight between Char and Amuro.

Why do you say that?

They never showed Akatsuki being damaged by those weapons.

Brightman's point was that the technology used in the Gundam shows in the '90s is the same as that used in the earlier ones. How does this refute that?

Besides, how does it make any difference what technique is used in the coloring process? Do you really think that digital color is superior to hand painting to such a degree that there's no way to compare the two?

It was not the same, I already mentioned that. Look at the amount of CGI effects in GS and GSD, they didn't even exist in any of the previous gundam shows.

In that case, I'll refer you to the necromancy-powered Gundams designed in the '80s.

By the way, what's your point referring to? If it's about the question of realism, then a "godly" Gundam is much more realistic than a "godly" pilot. Heck, since you been complaining about the Cosmic Era shows,

I presume you're referring about biosensors and psycoframes. They were nowhere near godly, and could only be used the more powerful newtypes. They could still be damaged by grunt weapons, and was damaged by them many times.

They deserve criticism.

Well, with melee weapons depicted as valid weapon choices, it's pretty obvious that the Gundam shows have been deep in the surreal zone all along. And then there's the stuff like psychic powers... I'm really not sure how anyone can argue that the UC Gundam TV shows are any more realistic than the other Gundam shows. While it's true that most anime battles aren't realistic, there are degrees of realism, and all of the Gundam TV shows weighs in at the Super Robot end.


Perhaps, but there's still really not that much difference between them.


Nope, that's not even close. Nuclear weapons are far more effective than any of the mobile suits in either show.

Realistic? Who said that they were realistic? I was trying to say that "godly" gundams seemed to turn the series super robot-ish and not real robot-ish like it was originally supposed to be. Nuclear weapons were not used because they cause mass destruction at once, even in the real world, they were only meant to deter aggression. Mobile suits, however, "usually" only take down a few suits and a few lives, and only those who are fighting, so it is "morally" more acceptable. (usually, in this case excludes the satellite cannon, which could be considered a nuclear weapon equipped onto a mobile suit)

[4Tran]

Originally Posted by brolycjw

Because you said it only did enough damage to shake the pilot, but it managed to damage the gundam directly. It happened in the second fight between Char and Amuro.

If I recall correctly, Char only managed to damage Amuro's shield. In fact, this engagement pointedly disproves Char's claim that he would show that "superior piloting skill would triumph over technology".

Originally Posted by brolycjw

They never showed Akatsuki being damaged by those weapons.

How's that logic supposed to work? That if we don't see "Weapon A" damaging "Target B", we should automatically assume that "Target B" is immune to "Weapon A"?

Originally Posted by brolycjw

It was not the same, I already mentioned that. Look at the amount of CGI effects in GS and GSD, they didn't even exist until in any of the previous gundam shows.

So? Brightman was talking about how the Gundam shows of the '90s were made with the same technology as the shows of the '70s and '80s. How does what you posted relate to that?

My aside was just to observe that most current shows are still technically hand-drawn. It's not an argument of any sort, so there's no point in trying to refute it.

Originally Posted by brolycjw

I was trying to say that "godly" gundams seemed to turn the series super robot-ish and not real robot-ish like it was originally supposed to be.

For the most part, the Gundam TV shows aren't much more realistic than their Super Robot counterparts.

Originally Posted by brolycjw

Nuclear weapons were not used because they cause mass destruction at once, even in the real world, they were only meant to deter aggression. Mobile suits, however, "usually" only take down a few suits and a few lives, and only those who are fighting, so it is "morally" more acceptable. (usually, in this case excludes the satellite cannon, which could be considered a nuclear weapon equipped onto a mobile suit)

Where do you get such weird ideas from?

[Demongod86]

Originally Posted by 4Tran

If you want a real world example, the U.S. has been at war since 2002, but there are very little signs of it suffering from it.

Bullshit. Try the largest deficit in history, a completely disenchanted nation, under-equipped troops, and the government we're trying to instate is composed of morons.

No, we're not all suddenly poor, but you better believe we've had happier days.

[4Tran]

Originally Posted by Demongod86

Bullshit. Try the largest deficit in history, a completely disenchanted nation, under-equipped troops, and the government we're trying to instate is composed of morons.

No, we're not all suddenly poor, but you better believe we've had happier days.

Hmm... Perhaps a better way to phrase my point would be to ask "How much has the lifestyle of the average American non-soldier been affected by the war?" A nation disenchanted with its government does not amount to a significant level of suffering, nor does realizing that one's leaders are idiots. A record deficit could be considered suffering if it also resulted in a significant drop in the economy, but that's been humming along so far. This will only really change when there are drastic changes imposed by the war, i.e. rationing, a military draft, a significant economic downturn, or massive casualties. So far, the American people haven't had to sacrifice a whole lot (especially compared to the major wars of the 20th century).

As the saying goes, "the American military went to war; the American people went to the mall".

[hipeach]

Originally Posted by 4Tran

Well, with melee weapons depicted as valid weapon choices, it's pretty obvious that the Gundam shows have been deep in the surreal zone all along. And then there's the stuff like psychic powers... I'm really not sure how anyone can argue that the UC Gundam TV shows are any more realistic than the other Gundam shows. While it's true that most anime battles aren't realistic, there are degrees of realism, and all of the Gundam TV shows weighs in at the Super Robot end.

Erm... say that to all those robot anime fans out there, when Gundam is what many people regard as the beginning of "real robot" shows after all. Really, you can have your own personal preferences of realism, but obviously most people regard UC shows where the protagonists have to fight hard with tricks and skills to win a 5 vs 15 battle as more realistic than winning a 3 vs 100 with a "godly" gundam standing there with no sweat, in robot animes at least. The fact is, the difference is there, and the difference that doesn't mean much for you can mean a lot for others, and vice versa. For example the use of melee weapons may completely invalidate the realism for you, but others can accept it with a suspension of disbelief when watching anime.

Perhaps, but there's still really not that much difference between them.

For you maybe, but for many others, there can be a big difference. I've seen people who think all Gundam shows are unrealistic, I've also seen people who think all Gundam shows are realistic enough. I've seen people who think the use of melee weapons doesn't matter much when the existence of two-legged giant robots already destroys all possible realism for them, and I've seen people who think whether two-legged doesn't mean much when the fact that giant robots need to be piloted by humans already destroys all realism for them. That really depends on personal preferences like everything else, but apparently a lot of Gundam fans draw a distinction between MSG and Wing as a qualitative change. For better or worse, again depends on personal preferences.

Nope, that's not even close. Nuclear weapons are far more effective than any of the mobile suits in either show.

When Epyon can cut a space fortess in half and Wing Zero can blow up a space colony, that's more than what a normal nuke can do in UC Gundam shows already And when in SEED they need several dozens of nukes to storm a ZAFT stronghold, in GSD they need just a couple "godly" gundam to blow past the whole ZAFT force

[4Tran]

Originally Posted by hipeach

Erm... say that to all those robot anime fans out there, when Gundam is what many people regard as the beginning of "real robot" shows after all.

It is; but it's only slightly more realistic than its Super Robot predecessors, and that's not saying a whole lot.

Originally Posted by hipeach

The fact is, the difference is there, and the difference that doesn't mean much for you can mean a lot for others, and vice versa. For example the use of melee weapons may completely invalidate the realism for you, but others can accept it with a suspension of disbelief when watching anime.

How realistic an engagement is and whether people accept an unrealistic element are different things. While the latter is a purely subjective measure, the former isn't. In fact, provided we apply the same metric to the shows, it's quite possible to objectively assess how realistic it is.

Originally Posted by hipeach

That really depends on personal preferences like everything else, but apparently a lot of Gundam fans draw a distinction between MSG and Wing as a qualitative change. For better or worse, again depends on personal preferences.

Perhaps. However, that doesn't mean that it's reasonable to do so.

Originally Posted by hipeach

When Epyon can cut a space fortess in half and Wing Zero can blow up a space colony, that's more than what a normal nuke can do in UC Gundam shows already And when in SEED they need several dozens of nukes to storm a ZAFT stronghold, in GSD they need just a couple "godly" gundam to blow past the whole ZAFT force

That's just because they made those particular structures really fragile . There's no indication that nuclear weapons couldn't do the same the same thing to them. The measure of a "weapon of mass destruction" is precisely that; a weapon that does indiscriminate damage to the vicinity. For certain applications, a precision weapon can be a much better choice than such a nuclear one.

In any case, I was commenting on how a nuclear weapon is vastly more effective in the strategic sense. Basically, an enemy equipped with nuclear weapons has to be dealt with completely differently than one that doesn't have them.

[brolycjw]

In any case, I was commenting on how a nuclear weapon is vastly more effective in the strategic sense. Basically, an enemy equipped with nuclear weapons has to be dealt with completely differently than one that doesn't have them.

Note that there are nuclear weapons in MSG, just that there was a treaty to prevent the use of it, so your argument of nuclear weapons being more effective is already denied in the show itself. That applies to real-life as well.

[hipeach]

Originally Posted by 4Tran

It is; but it's only slightly more realistic than its Super Robot predecessors, and that's not saying a whole lot.

Well, it's enough to make a distinction for most people, just like the difference between MSG and Wing is enough to make a dinstinction for a lot of people.

How realistic an engagement is and whether people accept an unrealistic element are different things. While the latter is a purely subjective measure, the former isn't. In fact, provided we apply the same metric to the shows, it's quite possible to objectively assess how realistic it is.

well, like I said, objectively, two legged giant robots piloted by humans are already nothing realistic. So we have to accept a certain degree of unrealistic stuff based on personal preferences anyway, or just say that there's no realism in robot anime at all. The fact is, MSG is indeed more realistic than Wing, however whether that makes the difference, that's highly subjective. For you maybe 3 vs. 100 easy fight is just a slight difference from 5 vs. 15 hard fight, while the use of melee weapon makes a hugh difference, but others can reasonably have different opinions.

Perhaps. However, that doesn't mean that it's reasonable to do so.

The reason is there, since we all agree there are differences, but when do the differences make the qualitative distinction, that depends on personal preferences. Some draw a line at two legged giant robot, some draw a line at the use of melee weapons, and some draw a line at "godly" Gundam fighting 3 vs. 100 no sweat. It's all reasonable, just different people with their different preferences and suspension of disbelief.

In any case, I was commenting on how a nuclear weapon is vastly more effective in the strategic sense. Basically, an enemy equipped with nuclear weapons has to be dealt with completely differently than one that doesn't have them.

well, a couple of "godly" Gundams are apparently more strategically effective than nukes in GSD

[4Tran]

Originally Posted by brolycjw

Note that there are nuclear weapons in MSG, just that there was a treaty to prevent the use of it, so your argument of nuclear weapons being more effective is already denied in the show itself. That applies to real-life as well.

Your logic is backwards. Usually speaking, a weapon is specifically banned because it's considered to be too powerful. By the way, just because a weapon has been banned by treaty, that doesn't mean that countries can't use them.

Originally Posted by hipeach

well, like I said, objectively, two legged giant robots piloted by humans are already nothing realistic. So we have to accept a certain degree of unrealistic stuff based on personal preferences anyway, or just say that there's no realism in robot anime at all. The fact is, MSG is indeed more realistic than Wing, however whether that makes the difference, that's highly subjective.

Not entirely. Realism a relative scale, and it's one that isn't all that hard to measure. Mobile Suit Gundam may be the most realistic of the UC TV shows, but it's still got the monster-of-the-week mobile armors and the psychic warriors. Whether it's more realistic than Wing is very much subject to question.

Originally Posted by hipeach

For you maybe 3 vs. 100 easy fight is just a slight difference from 5 vs. 15 hard fight, while the use of melee weapon makes a hugh difference, but others can reasonably have different opinions.

That's why it's important to establish metrics on how to measure the relative realism of the shows.

Originally Posted by hipeach

It's all reasonable, just different people with their different preferences and suspension of disbelief.

The relative realism of a show is not entirely a question of preference. How one reacts to a particular portrayal is.

As a point of order, it's important to note that opinions aren't necessarily equally valid.

Originally Posted by hipeach

well, a couple of "godly" Gundams are apparently more strategically effective than nukes in GSD

That isn't true at all. They may have had their uses tactically, but strategically speaking, they were relatively insignificant.

[brolycjw]

So? Brightman was talking about how the Gundam shows of the '90s were made with the same technology as the shows of the '70s and '80s. How does what you posted relate to that?

My aside was just to observe that most current shows are still technically hand-drawn. It's not an argument of any sort, so there's no point in trying to refute it.

Still, the animation of CE being better than UC is debatable anyway. Character designs in UC were unique, and all characters have very different facial features, appealing or not. While characters in CE have the same faces, with the only difference being the hair, hair color. eye color and gender, totally unrealistic when people in real lives can look so different. Let's not even get started about the mobile suit designs in CE, Dragoons idea taken from funnels, Destiny Gundam's wings of light copied from V2 Gundam, Gold plated Akatsuki copied from Hyaku Shiki, gold plates which deflect beams copied from V2 assault gundam, barrier generated originating from fin funnel barrier of Nu Gundam. I feel sorry for the original gundams, talk about a lack of creativity and plagiarism.

Your logic is backwards. Usually speaking, a weapon is specifically banned because it's considered to be too powerful. By the way, just because a weapon has been banned by treaty, that doesn't mean that countries can't use them.

Your view is myopic. The effectiveness of a weapon does not depend on the destruction it causes, the reason nuclear weapons are banned is because they cause mass destruction to innocent civilian lives, and when both sides have nuclear weapons, using them would utterly destroy each other and nothing would be left, defeating the purpose of war.

Not entirely. Realism a relative scale, and it's one that isn't all that hard to measure. Mobile Suit Gundam may be the most realistic of the UC TV shows, but it's still got the monster-of-the-week mobile armors and the psychic warriors. Whether it's more realistic than Wing is very much subject to question.

Yet, UC gundam series show a much more accurate portrayal of war, no one benefits, even the good side. Many side characters were killed in action, without much drama, just bam! dead. In CCA, even the two protagonists died. Few side characters died in the entire span of AU and CE, and even when they do, a big fuss is made about them. And Kira was simply being immature and retarded when he refused to take lives, as several great ms pilots said, having mercy for your enemy is endangering your own life. Usso killed the person who taught him that, despite his utmost respect for him. Even at 13 yo, he understood that logic, unlike another whiny 16 yo we all know. When your enemy goes to war, they are prepared to lay down their lives, if they lose and get killed, they deserve it. Furthermore, innocent lives might be lost if they enemy side is intending to cause harm to the population. Kira is the least realistic in terms of character if you want to argue about realism. I know this is going out of topic, but you kept referring to the pilots in UC series anyway.

[4Tran]

Originally Posted by brolycjw

Still, the animation of CE being better than UC is debatable anyway. <SNIP>

How does this comment have anything to do with the animation in the '90s? Please try to say on-topic: if you want to complain about the Cosmic Era shows, you should at least stick to complaining about the choreography. Save the complaining about character and mecha designs for a different thread.

Originally Posted by brolycjw

Your view is myopic. The effectiveness of a weapon does not depend on the destruction it causes, the reason nuclear weapons are banned is because they cause mass destruction to innocent civilian lives, and when both sides have nuclear weapons, using them would utterly destroy each other and nothing would be left, defeating the purpose of war.

Isn't that what I just said, that nuclear weapons are very effective in the strategic sense, but there may be better choices for certain tactical applications?

Originally Posted by brolycjw

Yet, UC gundam series show a much more accurate portrayal of war, no one benefits, even the good side.

Where did you get that idea from? It's quite possible for countries to come out of a war relatively unscathed.

Originally Posted by brolycjw

Many side characters were killed in action, without much drama, just bam! dead. In CCA, even the two protagonists died. Few side characters died in the entire span of AU and CE, and even when they do, a big fuss is made about them.

Having lots of characters die isn't necessarily more realistic than having few characters die. And to be honest, this should be subordinate to storytelling anyways, so it isn't really all that important.

Originally Posted by brolycjw

And Kira was simply being immature and retarded when he refused to take lives, as several great ms pilots said, having mercy for your enemy is endangering your own life.

Immature and retarded? I don't think so. Kira had seen plenty of combat before he started doing that, so it's obvious that he was well aware of the risks. He simply chose to disable enemies where he could despite them.

If you want to talk about characters being "immature and retarded", then the poster boy for that label is the one who didn't feel that he was being appreciated enough, so he pouted by taking off with his Gundam. If any later character is accused of being "immature and retarded", then it's clear that they're just influenced by the original !

Originally Posted by brolycjw

I know this is going out of topic, but you kept referring to the pilots in UC series anyway.

A pilot's performance correlates directly a mobile suit's performance in combat, and is hence on-topic. The rest of a pilot's character isn't; and would be considered off-topic.

[Ascaloth]

Originally Posted by brolycjw

They never showed Akatsuki being damaged by those weapons.

Eh, not exactly true, if my memory serves. I distinctly remember a Shin/Destiny vs. Cagalli/Akatsuki battle, where Destiny basically butchered Akatsuki with its beam boomerangs, and would have shred it to ribbons had not S Freedom appeared...and a Hero Unit the Destiny may have been, but unless there's something special about the specs of Destiny's beam boomerangs that I don't know about, then they're basically aerodynamic versions of the basic beam blade/tomahawk of the Windams/ZAKUs...which therefore means that a basic beam blade/tomahawk should be able to wound Akatsuki as effectively as Destiny's boomies did.

And don't ask me why beam melees can hurt Akatsuki where beam missiles can't.....I haven't got a clue, and I have no wish to be dragged into this argument.

[4Tran]

In order for Akatsuki's armor to function, it has to exploit a particular property of beams. Most likely, this is the same property that allowed Shinn to reflect a beam shot off his shield. Beam sabers don't display any of the properties that the beam shots have, so they probably work off a completely different principle. Since the armor no longer has that particular properly to exploit, it can't function (it's also unlikely to work against kinetic attacks for the same reason).

[J_Ridden]

IIRC Destiny's beam boomerang severed the Akatsuki's arm at the elbow joint.

[brolycjw]

Originally Posted by 4Tran

How does this comment have anything to do with the animation in the '90s? Please try to say on-topic: if you want to complain about the Cosmic Era shows, you should at least stick to complaining about the choreography. Save the complaining about character and mecha designs for a different thread.

Who was the one got me started on the technology of animation anyway?

Isn't that what I just said, that nuclear weapons are very effective in the strategic sense, but there may be better choices for certain tactical applications?

I don't recall utterly destroying the Earth or a colony as being strategic. Tell me a strategic application of it other than deterrence and scaring the crap out of everybody when a rogue country decides to build a nuclear weapon.

Having lots of characters die isn't necessarily more realistic than having few characters die. And to be honest, this should be subordinate to storytelling anyways, so it isn't really all that important.

It is a portrayal of war and showing how evil it is. Tomino's gundam has always been showing the cruelties of war, and not glorifying it.

Immature and retarded? I don't think so. Kira had seen plenty of combat before he started doing that, so it's obvious that he was well aware of the risks. He simply chose to disable enemies where he could despite them.

Choosing not to kill the enemy shows that he has no desire to win the war, killing the enemy troops is necessary as they can always repair the disabled suits and put the recovered troops back in them. If Bright were the captain, he would certainly sack Amuro as a pilot if he was disabling the enemy suits instead of destroying them outright. Speaking about that, Bright mentioned that if he had to destroy an enemy's colony to end a war, he would do it, that would save more innocent lives.

If you want to talk about characters being "immature and retarded", then the poster boy for that label is the one who didn't feel that he was being appreciated enough, so he pouted by taking off with his Gundam. If any later character is accused of being "immature and retarded", then it's clear that they're just influenced by the original !

Of course he was immature at the start, but he started to become mature after Ryu's death, and that's where character development comes in. This applies to Camille, Judau and especially Uso. Apparently Kira did not show any character development, other than choosing to be with Lacus after Fllay's death. Oh, and you just made another example of poor plagiarism.

A pilot's performance correlates directly a mobile suit's performance in combat, and is hence on-topic. The rest of a pilot's character isn't; and would be considered off-topic.

So I can say that a pilot's character can affect his fighting style, disabling or killing, therefore affecting combat as well? That's rubbish, when a pilot is limited by mobile suit specs, his performance would be severely hindered. There is no correlation at all.

[4Tran]

Originally Posted by J_Ridden

IIRC Destiny's beam boomerang severed the Akatsuki's arm at the elbow joint.

That may or may not have anything to do with the arm getting cut; so far, I've never seen anything to the effect that Akatsuki's beam armor only protects the gold portion.

Originally Posted by brolycjw

I don't recall utterly destroying the Earth or a colony as being strategic. Tell me a strategic application of it other than deterrence and scaring the crap out of everybody when a rogue country decides to build a nuclear weapon.

Do you understand the difference between a strategic weapon and a tactical one? You've already brought up two excellent uses of nuclear weapons without even employing them, why is it necessary to list more?

Originally Posted by brolycjw

It is a portrayal of war and showing how evil it is. Tomino's gundam has always been showing the cruelties of war, and not glorifying it.

This can be done without killing off lots of named characters as well. And in fact, the Tomino Gundam shows aren't very good at showing the "cruelties of war". There just isn't very much of an emotional edge to the deaths, so they don't have that much effect, no matter how many characters are seen dying.

Moreover, I'd argue that while there are anti-war messages in the older Gundam shows, there's also a certain amount of romance associated with it as well. As a result, war gets glorified by association.

Originally Posted by brolycjw

Choosing not to kill the enemy shows that he has no desire to win the war, killing the enemy troops is necessary as they can always repair the disabled suits and put the recovered troops back in them.

Wars aren't won by killing enemy troops.

Originally Posted by brolycjw

Of course he was immature at the start, but he started to become mature after Ryu's death, and that's where character development comes in.

Nah, Amuro didn't really mature until Zeta.

Originally Posted by brolycjw

Apparently Kira did not show any character development, other than choosing to be with Lacus after Fllay's death.

That would have far more to do with your lack of observation.

Originally Posted by brolycjw

Oh, and you just made another example of poor plagiarism.

What do you mean by that?

Originally Posted by brolycjw

So I can say that a pilot's character can affect his fighting style, disabling or killing, therefore affecting combat as well?

Sure, but fighting style doesn't have much to do with how well a mobile suit performs in combat.

[Dan the Man]

Originally Posted by 4Tran

This can be done without killing off lots of named characters as well. And in fact, the Tomino Gundam shows aren't very good at showing the "cruelties of war". There just isn't very much of an emotional edge to the deaths, so they don't have that much effect, no matter how many characters are seen dying.

I don't know. Zeta in particular had a very moving effect. In the last half of the series, 2 colonies are gassed, and one is blown apart by a gigantic laser. Right off the bat, millions of innocent people are killed for no real reason. Secondly, seeing many primary characters die had much more of a dramatic effect to me than any other Gundam series. When so many people you know and care for meet their end like that, it feels like someone you actually know has died. I know that may not be much of a valid point, but at least in my opinion, major casualties helps in establishing the idea of the cruelties of war.

Originally Posted by 4Tran

Moreover, I'd argue that while there are anti-war messages in the older Gundam shows, there's also a certain amount of romance associated with it as well. As a result, war gets glorified by association.

Well yeah, there has to be romance in Gundam, it's a given. That's a key element in nearly all fictional stories. I don't think it actually glorifies war, since a rational person won't see war as a way to find a girlfriend... but I will aree that it does take away from the overall war image Gundam usually tries to establish.

Originally Posted by 4Tran

Nah, Amuro didn't really mature until Zeta.

No argument there.

[Ascaloth]

I see, I see....

Another thing I've never really figured out is the point behind the anti-ship swords employed by Sword Strike, Sword Impulse, and Destiny. I mean, throughout GS, we've seen plenty of examples of Ginns cutting up EA ships with their basic swords, and in GSD, we've seen Legend cut through Destroys with a basic beam sword, and we all remember Strike Freedom doing a number on Messiah with his oversized, but still basic, METEOR beam swords. If basic beam swords are good enough for the job, what's the point of these anti-ship swords? The way I see it, they're only a weak spot, such as Kira demonstrated many times by disarming Shin's Destiny that way at least twice, and we all know how S Freedom grabbed Destiny's anti-ship sword with its bare hands alone, right?

[LoweGear]

Originally Posted by Ascaloth

I see, I see....

Another thing I've never really figured out is the point behind the anti-ship swords employed by Sword Strike, Sword Impulse, and Destiny. I mean, throughout GS, we've seen plenty of examples of Ginns cutting up EA ships with their basic swords, and in GSD, we've seen Legend cut through Destroys with a basic beam sword, and we all remember Strike Freedom doing a number on Messiah with his oversized, but still basic, METEOR beam swords. If basic beam swords are good enough for the job, what's the point of these anti-ship swords? The way I see it, they're only a weak spot, such as Kira demonstrated many times by disarming Shin's Destiny that way at least twice, and we all know how S Freedom grabbed Destiny's anti-ship sword with its bare hands alone, right?

It's called "the right tool for the right job". Sure, a basic beam saber can cut a ship, but then again a bread knife can cut meat with a little effort, as an analogy. The Anti-ship sword was designed to cut through heavy armor and large objects faster and more efficiently.

And you're citing some non-standard examples for basic beam saber use. Strike Freedom is not the kind of mech you'd logically expect to see in the battlefield, and the Destiny was never created to fight against such a machine. The Meteor was created with slicing large things in mind, so it's more than a "basic" beam saber. And of course, Kira's skills allowed him to perform his neat disarming tricks against Destiny. But then again, not everyone in the battlefield has Kira's 1337ness (would you expect the run-of-the-mill pilot to be able to perform a sword grab against Destiny? I think not).

Destiny's Anti-Ship sword seemed useless against the other Top-Tier MS because it was not designed to do so, something that was more of Shinn's fault than Destiny's design (he did have dueling beam saberangs for the occasion, he just never used them). Against the targets against which they were designed against, like slow moving mobile armors like Destroys or ships, the Anti-Ship sword does its job does fine.