What robot is the best?

[Hanamichi]

I dont know or even looked all the VF's in the Macross series & movies,so I'm asking a help from you guys,like what VF is the best or the lamest, etc...thanks!! ^_^

[orochi X]

Because of my lack of Macross knowledge . . . (only seen Plus)

I would say the YF 21 from Macross Plus :)

[death]

YF 19

or the

DYRL Strike valkryee

[thedarkmarine]

The one found here:

http://animeboards.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=37024

I don't know where it's from though...

[sidewinder]

overall, i'd have to stick with my fav...the VAF-6 series from Mospeada....say what you want about them, but they have just as many missiles, they're smaller and more heavily armored than any of the others, and i believe they are also faster....they also look the coolest

[death]

Originally posted by thedarkmarine
The one found here:

http://animeboards.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=37024

I don't know where it's from though...

If you ask me that ones just a little overarmed.

[Valkyrie]

No offence sidewinder, but you really should look at the stats of your Legioss VAF-6 before making such claims. The VF-11 can out do you VAF and has far more versatility to match. The VF-11C full armour has at least as much if not more missiles than both the alpha and beta variants combine. Do you know how many G's it can pull?? Guess not. A VF-11 can do about 3 by itself without it's extra customisations. If just armed with standard ordinance and FAST pack equiped, it's about 5 G's. Don't go for a popularity contest, go for facts.


As for this thread, it stated robots which can include VF's as well. So my pick would either be the 'Pheylos' design (said to be an anti-UNSPACY VF) or the VF-22 or a customised VF-19A/F/S.
But if you want raw firepower, a destoid or power armour is by no means left out. :D

[sidewinder]

well, i also go by what i think is more believable....although the valkyries may have the look of a modern day fighter, the alpha is more believable... it also has a more rugged appearance than the *cough*pansie*cough* valkyries.....and another thing -- anything that has more missiles than the beta (especially anything that has as many as the beta and alpha combined) would just be too farfetched....if it has that many missiles, then where's the plane? there's obviously no room for a plane in there ( i don't care how small your missiles are, you can't fit that many on there).....and also, if you are including "add-ons", then of course it has more firepower than the alpha...and by "G's ", what are you referring too??? speed or manueverability??? if the latter, then any modern day fighter would be superior to any veritech :confused: ... also, if it came down to an atmospheric fight, a valkyrie with all that extra baggage may be able to go fast, but it will not turn.....no matter what your stats say....in the end, it comes down to what would really be better....that, of course, would be the VAF...

[isamudyson]

A Valk is far more aerodynamic than a Legios. Not sure where you get that a Valkyrie isn't agile. Let's see Max in a VF-1 vs Stick in a Legioss and see who wins.

[sidewinder]

i said a valk with "add-ons"....a VF in armor wouldn't be too manuverable (in fact, that configuration would fall like a rock)....
...and i'd be willing to bet that Scott(i prefer that name) would win....mainly because the VF-1 is outgunned.... and i stress the fact that the VAF was made as an improvement over the original VF....
and you have to remember that there is more to a VF than just the fighter mode... the large battloid mode of the VF is far more cumbersome than the smaller VAF....
and don't forget the fact that the VAF carries a Cyclone, thus adding to the pilots survivability... and the cyclone is just plain cool...
that one valk with (as you claim) around 200 missiles is completely unbelievable...the beta has somewhere in the neighborhood of 120 (it's been a long time since i've played the rpg, so i don't recall the exact number) missiles....and it is purely a missile launching platform...as you can see, the beta is big and ugly (which is far more believable than that valk)...

[thedarkmarine]

I never thougt it's fair to say whih is your fav, based on performance. Fact is, it's gonna get better, and better, and better. Of course the Legios is gonna be better than a Valk; why do you think they replace the Valk with it anyways?

[death]

OK...

Think about what you said sidewinder.

'The Valk cant carry that many missles

Though it cant use its FAST packs in an atmosphear it can still carry 30 missles mounted on wing pilons. The main thing that limets G forces these dasy is the pilots not the planes. Some fighters can pull G's that will black men out in no time. Thats not really a limeting factor. Expecally if you think about how these are space fighters we are talking about. They would be construted of titanium alloys or some thing. In an atmostheare your VAF would be Slower. Have a larger turning circle but still has the leg up in weaponary.

[death]

OK...

Think about what you said sidewinder.

'The Valk cant carry that many missles

Though it cant use its FAST packs in an atmosphear it can still carry 30 missles mounted on wing pilons. The main thing that limets G forces these dasy is the pilots not the planes. Some fighters can pull G's that will black men out in no time. Thats not really a limeting factor. Expecally if you think about how these are space fighters we are talking about. They would be construted of titanium alloys or some thing. In an atmostheare your VAF would be Slower. Have a larger turning circle but still has the leg up in weaponary.

In space the Valks would have their FAST packs to even up the playing fields in the way of weaponay. Turning circles would be negligable and speed not such a diciding factor as weapon ranges are increased.

[Valkyrie]

Now this is disappointing, the responses from sidewinder has got to be amongst the lamest response to any thread from AB since I got here. Not only do you fail to notice that the original thread was based on Macross and not Robotech, you fail to know the difference. It's even sadder when others also believe in your jargon.

You don't even show stats or facts about what you say, rather, opinions that are obviously skewed. Neither do really answer directly to my response with any real terms of logic except saying what looks better; showing that you don't think about facts but just your views on what's more eye pleasing to the beholder. From there it can be seen that you're lying straight away about your ideals on thoughts over aesthetics.

Quote: well, i also go by what i think is more believable....although the valkyries may have the look of a modern day fighter, the alpha is more believable... "

Really?? Where's the facts?? I can claim and shout all the way to the bank that I am a millionaire but without the facts to prove it, I might as well be a bum on a street.

Quote: "it also has a more rugged appearance than the *cough*pansie*cough* valkyries.....and another thing"

Like I said, a big sense of hypocricy compared to your previous quote.

Quote: "-- anything that has more missiles than the beta (especially anything that has as many as the beta and alpha combined) would just be too farfetched....if it has that many missiles, then where's the plane? there's obviously no room for a plane in there ( i don't care how small your missiles are, you can't fit that many on there)"

So you want to put a limit on what you deem as enough missiles- right... :rolleyes: So I can put limits like VAF's shouldn't be at x height or have x amount of weight as well yeah?? You obviously haven't seen Macross other than taht Robotech rip-off and yet you make your judgements. Try watching both to make a sound and proper judgement with real logic. You failed to even try and explain how VAF's can counter reactionary missiles in VF's and that VT's are nothing like VF's. After the first series of Robotech Macross and RT diverge- showing that you obviously are either an ignorant fan or some amatuer. You haven't seen VF's in their current state, which are bigger than your VAF's and can thus carry more and yet you want to make ludicrous claims of amounts of missiles which can be carried or more claims about how far fetched VF's are. Sounds like you're somewhat short sighted about these types of affairs- you have only seen part of the world but can claim that you've seen the best.

Quote: ".....and also, if you are including "add-ons", then of course it has more firepower than the alpha"

Mate, if you actually read my post, I insisted that the "add-on's" were superior to your Alpha and Beta... try to keep up ;)

Quote: "...and by "G's ", what are you referring too??? speed or manueverability??? if the latter, then any modern day fighter would be superior to any veritech ... also, if it came down to an atmospheric fight, a valkyrie with all that extra baggage may be able to go fast, but it will not turn.....no matter what your stats say....in the end, it comes down to what would really be better....that, of course, would be the VAF..."

Now here's a good joke: you state all these claims about how Valks can't do this and do that- but yet you have nothing to back it up and that VAF's can do it.... with no reason other than you like them. You know little about how VF's work and that modern day fighters don't stand a chance to a VAF let alone a VF in manoeuvrebility, speed or firepower. G's are what force that can be applied on an object to change direction, that's the essence of manoeuvrebility and yet you just want to shrug off science... don't see where your logic's coming from :rolleye:

Quote: "said a valk with "add-ons"....a VF in armor wouldn't be too manuverable (in fact, that configuration would fall like a rock).... "

Yeah and have you actually seen what's in these add ons?? Guess not- you're obviously wrong in this aspect because you haven't even seen the types of FAST packs that VF's have. This flawed thinking is ridiculous- how can you make judgements on such flimsy material? I can guess why- it's because you don't have the facts just your opinions.... which don't add up other than "you like them" so you're just a biased person with no standing in terms of logic on this matter. The more engines/thrusters/verniers a VF has, the more manoeuvreable it is and thus can do tighter turns than VAF's due to their superior engine thrust and streamline design.


Quote: "...and i'd be willing to bet that Scott(i prefer that name) would win....mainly because the VF-1 is outgunned.... and i stress the fact that the VAF was made as an improvement over the original VF.... "

Who ever said original VF?? You and your assumptions... note that the opening thread said VF's of all series- not original ones.


"and you have to remember that there is more to a VF than just the fighter mode... the large battloid mode of the VF is far more cumbersome than the smaller VAF..."

Not at all.... small fighters doesn't mean a thing if they don't have the power in their engines to make them useful... you saying that a baby is more nimble than an athlete because he/she is smaller?? Sure... F-15's are really going to be more useless than a Spitfire right??

Quote: "and don't forget the fact that the VAF carries a Cyclone, thus adding to the pilots survivability... and the cyclone is just plain cool... "

Useless to the point of which is better- VF's or VAF's. Cylones would do little in terms of combat against VF's when they engage VAF's, cyclones don't exactly do combat anywhere.


Quote:" that one valk with (as you claim) around 200 missiles is completely unbelievable...the beta has somewhere in the neighborhood of 120 (it's been a long time since i've played the rpg, so i don't recall the exact number) missiles....and it is purely a missile launching platform...as you can see, the beta is big and ugly (which is far more believable than that valk)..."

Sad, you don't see something and yet you claim it's impossible even though you're wrong. You haven't seen the series so why do you even try to make a comparison and such a comment?? The fact remains that it can and has fired over 100 missiles- not your 200 missiles that you have made up. You're nothing more than someone saying man can't fly even though somewhere else in the world, it's been proven otherwise.

I'm not trying to be harsh here sidewinder, but let's cut to the chase- it's hardly fair to make your type of judgements without actually having all the facts. I'm not here just to badger you, but I will point out that these posts of yours aren't making any sort of sense.

[sidewinder]

first of all, stats are meaningless. in the end, they are completely made up. the only true test is to actually make them.


Not only do you fail to notice that the original thread was based on Macross and not Robotech, you fail to know the difference. It's even sadder when others also believe in your jargon. incorrect. the question is "what robot is the best?"
secondly ... i am using very broad terms. i say VF instead of specific models....
Really?? Where's the facts?? I can claim and shout all the way to the bank that I am a millionaire but without the facts to prove it, I might as well be a bum on a street. again, your "facts" are make believe.
So you want to put a limit on what you deem as enough missiles- right... So I can put limits like VAF's shouldn't be at x height or have x amount of weight as well yeah?? You obviously haven't seen Macross other than taht Robotech rip-off and yet you make your judgements. Try watching both to make a sound and proper judgement with real logic. You failed to even try and explain how VAF's can counter reactionary missiles in VF's and that VT's are nothing like VF's. After the first series of Robotech Macross and RT diverge- showing that you obviously are either an ignorant fan or some amatuer. You haven't seen VF's in their current state, which are bigger than your VAF's and can thus carry more and yet you want to make ludicrous claims of amounts of missiles which can be carried or more claims about how far fetched VF's are. Sounds like you're somewhat short sighted about these types of affairs- you have only seen part of the world but can claim that you've seen the best i'm sorry, but this is terribly stupid. the fact the valk is bigger is what makes it worse. the alpha was made smaller so it wouldn't be cumbersome and because it was fighting invid and not zentradi. a big slow mech is fine when you are fighting zentradi, but invid will tear you to pieces. and please tell me how you can fit 200 missiles on a modern day sized fighter jet. you absolutely can't. not even with all these add-ons....the robotech veritech armor is completely believable, because you sacrifice speed and flight capability for armor and missles. the beta is not some sleek sexy fighter jet. it a big bulbous missile platform, and yet it still doesn't have that many missiles.
Mate, if you actually read my post, I insisted that the "add-on's" were superior to your Alpha and Beta... try to keep up so, they need additions to be better??? i thought this was about the best mech, and not the mech with the most toys :confused: ...
Sad, you don't see something and yet you claim it's impossible even though you're wrong. You haven't seen the series so why do you even try to make a comparison and such a comment?? The fact remains that it can and has fired over 100 missiles- not your 200 missiles that you have made up. You're nothing more than someone saying man can't fly even though somewhere else in the world, it's been proven otherwise. i am going by what you said. you said -- "The VF-11C full armour has at least as much if not more missiles than both the alpha and beta variants combine." the VAF has 70, and the VBF has over 100....that's around 200....unless i don't know how to add :confused2
I'm not trying to be harsh here sidewinder, but let's cut to the chase- it's hardly fair to make your type of judgements without actually having all the facts. I'm not here just to badger you, but I will point out that these posts of yours aren't making any sort of sense. again, there are no "facts".

and that whole 'Gs' thing is still rather confusing...you're telling me that a valk can only get 5 when a modern day fighter can pull more than 9 :confused: ....

[Valkyrie]

Now this is really sad- your comments just went from wrong and ignorant, to downright imbecilic. What I'm seeing right here is down right hypocritical- you don't answer the points of contention that makes your logic unsound and you rummage around for more garbage like "these facts aren't real, their made up" which shows that you really do have a sad routine.

Quote: "first of all, stats are meaningless. in the end, they are completely made up. the only true test is to actually make them. "

Now here's an example of the epitomy of stupidity... you say stats are meaningless and yet you say VAF's can have better stats on the grounds that you like them. Shoji Kawamori was an engineer before he made VF's; the designs are sound in every way except that we can't make fusion engines in any viably small package. This realism is the reason for its original popularity- much like MS Gundam. His statistics are far more safer to believe than any of your unbacked garbage that you fail to present properly- I can't take your word that VAF's are better because you fail to even answer simple questions like what stats they have other than I have to trust your word on it. VAF's aren't even real so I don't see why you're stupid enough to bring up why the true test is to actually make 1- that argument cancels any of your points you bring up and proves you really have no idea what you're talking about.... not a clue.

Quote: "incorrect. the question is "what robot is the best?"
secondly ... i am using very broad terms. i say VF instead of specific models.... "

Well, buddy, if you read closely after the title, the post specified VF's from the Macross universe- none of the nonsense your talking about. From such a narrow and ignorant viewpoint such as yours, it's no wonder you have to resort to 'broad terms'. You think you can represent clear point of view when you haven't even seen the other party/side of which you've already made a judgement.

Quote: "i'm sorry, but this is terribly stupid. the fact the valk is bigger is what makes it worse. the alpha was made smaller so it wouldn't be cumbersome and because it was fighting invid and not zentradi. a big slow mech is fine when you are fighting zentradi, but invid will tear you to pieces.

Size means nothing in terms of design. It's how they're shaped and what they're powered with. So your telling me that a Kitty Hawk, which is smaller than an Apache is more manoeuvreable and faster than the latter?? That proves to me you don't know very much about the basics of physics. Size doesn't matter as much as as it's engines/power.

Quote: "and please tell me how you can fit 200 missiles on a modern day sized fighter jet. you absolutely can't. not even with all these add-ons....the robotech veritech armor is completely believable, because you sacrifice speed and flight capability for armor and missles. the beta is not some sleek sexy fighter jet. it a big bulbous missile platform, and yet it still doesn't have that many missiles. "

Sad, you haven't seen the series but instead rave on and on about your expectations. Your gross incompetence reminds me of people claiming that computers the size of a PC isn't possible. What makes you think that you can put restrictions on what's already been done when you haven't seen what's available. In your narrow mind you're stuck in a deluded world where fighters must be what you want not what's possible or in reality from the stats provided.

Quote: "so, they need additions to be better??? i thought this was about the best mech, and not the mech with the most toys..."

Strange, your Alpha and Beta combined can also be called an "add on". Note that I used quotations because other people here used the term "add-ons". Your definition of toys is perposterous. the thread said best mecha, thus a design that can do most damage with respects to numbers and performance in several categories. If a VF-11 is versatile as well as an exceptional specialised fighter, what's wrong with that?? Being versatile means there's less weaknesses than some design specialising on just one thing and abandoning other ideals important in combat. Seems to me you're just short sighted in the view of best mecha.

Quote: "i am going by what you said. you said -- "The VF-11C full armour has at least as much if not more missiles than both the alpha and beta variants combine." the VAF has 70, and the VBF has over 100....that's around 200....unless i don't know how to add"

Well I guess you can't read more than can't count. Note that I said the Zaubergeran could fire over 100 missiles and that the VF-11C was capable of firing more than your VAF's combined. A standard VF-11 can fire over 30 missiles while the additional armour variant has additional missile packs of over 100 and FAST packs increase this to a further 30-50 depending on what FAST pack is desired. I never stated anything about 200 missiles.

Quote: "and that whole 'Gs' thing is still rather confusing...you're telling me that a valk can only get 5 when a modern day fighter can pull more than 9 ...."

Yeah, you definitely don't know a thing about manoeuvrebility. The G's that I stated were the amount of power each VF has in terms of thrust. G limits in terms of stress is completely different. Seems to me you have little clue about physics on simple things like combat. An F-15 C has only the thrust of 0.735 G's while it's stress limit is completely different where manovoeuvres can take more than 6-10 G's.

Unless you can back up your banter with real facts other than your deluded thoughts I recommend that you not continue. This is reminecent of many RT fans I see constantly in other forums. They really just don't get/have the facts but blab on and on. Frankly put, you can't see beyond your little world of what's real or otherwise. In some areas you down right contradict yourself with somewhat superficial statements to this matter.

[isamudyson]

I say we get Keith or Edo over here and see what they have to say.

[sidewinder]

Strange, your Alpha and Beta combined can also be called an "add on". Note that I used quotations because other people here used the term "add-ons". that is really nice to know :rolleyes: ...but considering i never even mentioned the beta along with the alpha in the first place.....
Yeah, you definitely don't know a thing about manoeuvrebility. The G's that I stated were the amount of power each VF has in terms of thrust. G limits in terms of stress is completely different. Seems to me you have little clue about physics on simple things like combat. An F-15 C has only the thrust of 0.735 G's while it's stress limit is completely different where manovoeuvres can take more than 6-10 G's. and if you would have listened, i asked what was meant by G's...i was further confused by this statement by death --
Though it cant use its FAST packs in an atmosphear it can still carry 30 missles mounted on wing pilons. The main thing that limets G forces these dasy is the pilots not the planes. Some fighters can pull G's that will black men out in no time.
and btw, if you want to quote stats from modern day fighters, then picking the latest variant is always a good idea....not to mention a more recent fighter.....not that there's too much out there that's under 20 years old in the first place.....
Well I guess you can't read more than can't count. Note that I said the Zaubergeran could fire over 100 missiles and that the VF-11C was capable of firing more than your VAF's combined. A standard VF-11 can fire over 30 missiles while the additional armour variant has additional missile packs of over 100 and FAST packs increase this to a further 30-50 depending on what FAST pack is desired. I never stated anything about 200 missiles. and now you are using utterly stupid technicalities...of course you didn't say '200', but you did say 'alpha and beta combined' which means around 200 missiles...

and please note, that the valks have had numerous upgrades, whereas the VAF has had...well....none(not officially i believe) ... so of course a valk is going to be better without a comperable VAF to compare it too. i'm absolutely sure that a VAF that has undergone as many upgrades as the valk, will better the valk by far....

Sad, you haven't seen the series but instead rave on and on about your expectations. Your gross incompetence reminds me of people claiming that computers the size of a PC isn't possible. What makes you think that you can put restrictions on what's already been done when you haven't seen what's available. In your narrow mind you're stuck in a deluded world where fighters must be what you want not what's possible or in reality from the stats provided. make a fully transformable f-14 sized mech that can fully perform to all those specifications(every last one of 'em). then add all the necessary pilot's compartment/controls, electronics, landing gear, armor, hydrolics(there'll be a lot of 'em), engines(they're also air sucking, not just rockets), other weaponry (any attached weapon...this includes gun pod if it is housed inside of the mech like the VAF's is), ect (and remember, there still has to be room for all that stuff to move around adequately to transform)...plus add all of the necessary add-ons and then fit in 200 missiles. if it is still the same valk as what it's supposed to look like and it performs exactly the way you say it should (if not better), then i'll concede the point.
In your narrow mind you're stuck in a deluded world where fighters must be what you want not what's possible or in reality from the stats provided. that's a laugh......you really have no idea how wrong you are there......
I can't take your word that VAF's are better because you fail to even answer simple questions like what stats they have other than I have to trust your word on it. VAF's aren't even real so I don't see why you're stupid enough to bring up why the true test is to actually make 1- that argument cancels any of your points you bring up and proves you really have no idea what you're talking about.... not a clue. well, i guess technically they aren't better....but i think they are. and you are wrong about "that argument cancels any of your points you bring up and proves you really have no idea what you're talking about", because i admitted it is all speculation. i am not trying to back anything with pure (fictional)stats. i'm going by how it would do in the real world. i think the VAF is hands down the best. i'm not spouting useless statistics, so trying to attack my "stats"(when i have none) is about as useless and attacking air.... "being the best" is derived from more than your trivial statistics....
Now here's an example of the epitomy of stupidity... i won't even comment here....if such matters bring about the epitomy of stupidity in your mind, then you are truly sad....you really need to re-evaluate a few things......

if you don't have anything constructive to say, then just leave it at that.... i believe the VAF is the best, you don't. that's fine with me.

[Valkyrie]

Quote: "that is really nice to know ...but considering i never even mentioned the beta along with the alpha in the first place..... "

Well I guess you don't understand simple subtle statements that it can obviously out do Alphas alone and thus don't stand much of a chance unless you get something else. :rolleyes2:

Quote: "and btw, if you want to quote stats from modern day fighters, then picking the latest variant is always a good idea....not to mention a more recent fighter.....not that there's too much out there that's under 20 years old in the first place..... "

Odd, an F-15 C is about just as old as a VF-11C in terms of years in sevice for both organisations. Not to mention that an F-15E has under a G of thrust anyway and F-22's or the JSF can't do 2 G's without customisations and no armament. An advanced VF can do better but you don't see me pulling all the facts to prove that your statement is misguided.

Quote: "and now you are using utterly stupid technicalities...of course you didn't say '200', but you did say 'alpha and beta combined' which means around 200 missiles... "

I prefer accuracy than rounded figures- especially from you. Rounded figures distort the truth and that's something that should be avoided at all costs. Distorting the truth always lead to skewed exaggerations.

Quote: "and please note, that the valks have had numerous upgrades, whereas the VAF has had...well....none(not officially i believe) ... so of course a valk is going to be better without a comperable VAF to compare it too. i'm absolutely sure that a VAF that has undergone as many upgrades as the valk, will better the valk by far.... "

VF's weren't upgraded as much as new designs. Upgrades don't compare to new models which have been made by VF's such as the VF-19 or VF-22. As for your ridiculous idea about "add-ons", beta's are also considered "add-ons"; so can outside features like guns, ammunition and missiles. Thus anything with extra material without direct assistance of other mechas are extra 'toys' as you call it. You can say all you want about how they have upgrades and so forth but the fact remains that they're better. Your point about more upgrades is easily ridiculed: warplanes are compared to what's available; if the opponent doesn't have a better model it's obviously not superior on the grounds that it had less 'upgrades'.

I'm sure some company that made WW2 planes superior to a current company in the past is really going to say they have a superior design due to the fact the adversary had more 'upgrades/models'. :rolleyes2:

If you look at it, I can also go with this type of arguement saying that VF's can keep 'upgrading/designing' better VF's since VF's are more versatile and thoroughly designed. But you would simply say that it's unfair to make things up- which is exactly what your doing. You can't say that VAF's would be better because they must/will make better designs; just as I can't say VF's could be mass-produce to be a penultimate weapon to turn back time and create superstring bombs as standard armament.

Just a question, you can jog my memory on this one, but in RT wasn't there a VAF-6 and VAF-7??

Quote: "make a fully transformable f-14 sized mech that can fully perform to all those specifications(every last one of 'em). then add all the necessary pilot's compartment/controls, electronics, landing gear, armor, hydrolics(there'll be a lot of 'em), engines(they're also air sucking, not just rockets), other weaponry (any attached weapon...this includes gun pod if it is housed inside of the mech like the VAF's is), ect (and remember, there still has to be room for all that stuff to move around adequately to transform)...plus add all of the necessary add-ons and then fit in 200 missiles. if it is still the same valk as what it's supposed to look like and it performs exactly the way you say it should (if not better), then i'll concede the point"

Glad to see that you never fail to remind me how slow you are. You haven't seen Macross Plus or 7 to see how a VF-11 looks like but you have made up your mind up on the size: an F-14. If you've seen the VF-11 you'll note several differeneces other than your ignorant view of a VF-1.

Quote: "that's a laugh......you really have no idea how wrong you are there...... "

Coming from a guy who doesn't know anything about areodynamics, I'll take it as a complement. I actually have a relative who is a pilot and knows his aircraft. I take it you can't give me much on vectoring either?? The only person I repected on this matter in anything Macross was to a person named Nied. Someone whom I enjoyed a long discussion about fighters- doubt you're his calibre though. I know more about fighters and warfare than I care to give; and from what I've seen, what I've given is more than suffiecient to prove you wrong. Further to the point, you don't have much of a reply to the Apache and Kitty Hawk arguement- if I'm wrong, you're even more wrong due to the fact that you focus on petty statements and leave out the facts such as the former mentioned. You seem to ignore your mistakes and conveniently ignore the facts when they go against you. You have no counter to that and thus it obviously shows that I have the superior intellect on this matter. I don't really need to re-iterate on this any further.

"well, i guess technically they aren't better....but i think they are. and you are wrong about "that argument cancels any of your points you bring up and proves you really have no idea what you're talking about", because i admitted it is all speculation. i am not trying to back anything with pure (fictional)stats. i'm going by how it would do in the real world. i think the VAF is hands down the best. i'm not spouting useless statistics, so trying to attack my "stats"(when i have none) is about as useless and attacking air.... "being the best" is derived from more than your trivial statistics.... "

Ahh yes... your trivial arugment about how things work in the real world. Pity your limited on what you think you have rather than what's present with our technology. Coming from a series based on a science-fiction genre, we have to make a safe assumption that if the facts from credible sites were real; what would be the result: and I presented that case with these stats to back it up. You on the other hand came up with opinions and your skewed view that smaller is always better and that looks seem to be your telling factor in judgement.
The whole thread was based on this 'specualtion' that if these facts were real what would be the outcome. There was nothing else to rely on but the stats presented from credible sites and Shoji's engineering skills- you an engineer by any chance?? You bring up an arugment that has nothing more than opinion and a sloppy defence of your facts aren't real but yet they have more credibility than your shabby presentations. Not only that, your comment defeats the purpose of this thread or anime in many matters. Saying prove it without the science to back you statements up or the stats to present be it paper or otherwise is useless.

Quote: "i won't even comment here....if such matters bring about the epitomy of stupidity in your mind, then you are truly sad....you really need to re-evaluate a few things......

if you don't have anything constructive to say, then just leave it at that.... i believe the VAF is the best, you don't. that's fine with me."


In terms of the points presented in your contention, it's certainly stupid to say a comment that incriminates/damages your 'sound' viewpoint and claim it as a defence. To me that point is the epitomy of stupidity in that post.

It seems to me that you're taking this thread very seriously and I don't really care whether it offends you or otherwise because on the net, being personal is really a negative habit I don't reccommend. You were increasingly stubborn and ignored facts like reactionary weapons and other issues that unhinged your points presented.

I don't care whether you like VAF's better than VF's or not. That's your opinion, it's fine by me. It's what you said in your second post on this matter- you thought about the factors already and said that your views are unchanged on performance. Your view was flawed, I proved it, and you did nothing more than present shabby and petty points that do little to negate the fact that you were wrong. Guess you didn't think deep enough.

Unless you can prove it otherwise, you either are dense and stubborn or a hypocrite- you decide. You said that you had a rational mind but failed to fully utilise it to prove my points.

As for the rather blunt responses you're seeing on this thread, I do this to all RT fans out there who are wrong, are too stubborn and attempt argue with me. There are plenty of of RT fans who are as dense or denser than yourself and I don't spare any liberties to politely explain everything when they refute evidence like this. I'm not here to change your views on what you like or otherwise, but you are wrong on what's been said about VF's and VAF's.

[sidewinder]

You haven't seen Macross Plus divinely inspired are we ? and yes, i have seen parts of Macross Plus including the battle between the 19 and 21....
F-22's or the JSF can't do 2 G's without customisations and no armament don't contradict yourself. "customisation" has been a large part of your quite pointless argument.
: warplanes are compared to what's available; if the opponent doesn't have a better model it's obviously not superior on the grounds that it had less 'upgrades'. and as you have pointed out, mospeada and macross are along two different paths. the only reason that the valk is any better, is because macross went farther than the robotech series did. in macross, they stuck with the valk design. in mospeada, they went to the VAF design because it was superior to the valk design. the VF-1 is the basic valk design. But since the robotech series was cut short, the VAF wasn't given a chance to be improved like the VF design was.
and if i recall correctly, a panel of experts did say that the B-17 was the best bomber of the last century (it was on DWings, and i wasn't able to see the other types of aircraft, but this clearly shows that a plane doesn't even have to be close to modern to still be considered the best).... like i said previously -- "being the best" is derived from more than your trivial statistics....

Just a question, you can jog my memory on this one, but in RT wasn't there a VAF-6 and VAF-7?? ....i thought that particular model was the 6s, but it turns out that there was a 7a. so yes, there was a VAF-7. this is your VAF-7a -- http://www.kent.net/robotech/mecha/ref/shadow_fighter.shtml ...but it has the exact same specs as the 6 series with the exception of the shadow cloaking device. and it's appearance is changed slightly. here is the 6r -- http://www.kent.net/robotech/mecha/ref/recon_alpha.shtml (just to show basically why the design was adopted over the VF)... the VAF also has one of these -- http://www.kent.net/robotech/mecha/ref/battler.shtml ... if you read, it's armor is nearly as strong as the VF-1's. the addition of a cyclone makes the VAF far more versatile than any VF.
since the VAF does not have any "packs", i will state the VBF's stats (since you seem so inclined to think i already have) -- http://www.kent.net/robotech/mecha/ref/beta_fighter.shtml ...
and all this from it's first generation design.....
I prefer accuracy than rounded figures- especially from you. Rounded figures distort the truth and that's something that should be avoided at all costs. Distorting the truth always lead to skewed exaggerations. well, according to the only source i have available, the total is 168. however, i seem to remember it as 178. either way, that's a lot of missiles. not to mention that those 8 missiles are not the tiny short range missiles. the VBF also carries 11 gravity bombs. and 3 gun pods....i guess they're for the alpha, considering that the VBF isn't supposed to be able to use those.
but as i read more and more, i believe the actual number is 178 (if not more, considering i don't remember how many the VBF has...but 108 sounds about right...i guess)...there seem to be a few incorrect stats at this site (it says the cyclone armor is 7 ft tall, but i'm pretty sure it is closer to 8)
Glad to see that you never fail to remind me how slow you are. You haven't seen Macross Plus or 7 to see how a VF-11 looks like but you have made up your mind up on the size: an F-14. If you've seen the VF-11 you'll note several differeneces other than your ignorant view of a VF-1. ....on the verge of hiprocracy it seems... so where are you stats? if you want stats from me, then you better give them too. and i find it interesting that you don't seem to target the rest of the "request"...
Coming from a guy who doesn't know anything about areodynamics, I'll take it as a complement. I actually have a relative who is a pilot and knows his aircraft. again it would seem that you are divinely inspired :rolleyes: ... i know much more than most, and i know the important things, not trivial specs that only an engineer would care about....and that answers another question you had.....


and i believe that i asked you not to reply if you didn't have anything constructive to say.....what you said was far from constructive....

[sidewinder]

oh, and if you could provide me with a page that gives all the specs for the VAF, then that'd be nice.......i've never even heard such specific stats (that you give for the valk) given for the VAF, so i'd like to know if there actually are any.....
oh, and btw-- Glad to see that you never fail to remind me how slow you are. You haven't seen Macross Plus or 7 to see how a VF-11 looks like but you have made up your mind up on the size: an F-14. If you've seen the VF-11 you'll note several differeneces other than your ignorant view of a VF-1. ...fine, make it about 13 feet shorter and about half the wingspan of a f-14....

[Steathassasn]

omg..valkarie has a Virtual On avatar anyway

the ALpha fighter is the best

[Vandread]

Darn these guys went at it

[shader]

I liked the Macross itself, or perhaps the Macross cannon things from Macross II (That fried 60% of the Marduk fleet with one volley)

[Steathassasn]

personaly i like the Alpha fighter for selfish reasons...which i will now list

in on particular order

1) alpha has the best looking gerwalk mode out of all the series and macross movies ( although Macross Plus's YF-19's gerwalk looks kinda cool too )

2) if it was real...i could keep it in my back yard ( in gerwalk mode of course )

3) its just plain "cute"

4) it comes ( in some models) with a cyclone ...extra plus

:D

5) ...a...i ran out of ideas ...sorry...


all and all its the little "sporty" fighter of the entire Macross continum

and thats why i love it
:D : stands next to his blue civic ..and blue alpha fighter :: buy one get one free ....i love HONDA!

[Vandread]

Steath man........

HAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHA:lol:


What will you come up with next:)

[Valkyrie]

Woah, turn your back for a holiday and the plot thickens... or rather the stagnant ignorance I see constantly from amatuers rears its ugly head once again.

Since I've been sleep deprived since camp, I'll just name a few points you've seemed to miss and then answer accordingly when I have time to waste.

divinely inspired are we ? and yes, i have seen parts of Macross Plus including the battle between the 19 and 21....

This is rich, you claim to have seen the final battle of Macross Plus as well as other scenes, combined with your quote on "i know the important things, not trivial specs that only an engineer would care about...." and your statement that VF's only fire about 6-8 missiles seem to be lacking a few major points.

Few pointers: if you did see the Macross Plus battle scene, you would note the YF-21 fired far more than 8 missiles during Isamu's infamous manoeuvre. You claim to know better than Shoji Kawamori (whom you believe made stats up only) but yet you can say that VAF's are more manoeuvreable. But you don't have the thrust stats to match a standard VF nor the engine designs to logically follow up on your comments. Neither does basic physics back you up: your design is heavier than a VF unloaded, so at maximum manoeuvrebility, you still are inferior to a similar or even heavier armed VF. Your theory on "smaller is better" is shot to hell without ample power of engines. That and the Alpha can be easily seen as bulky and not aerodynamic in comparison to the YF-19 or VF-22 means they have increased drag. You also do know that forward swept wings with variable geometry increases manoeuvrebility far higher than your VAF, but of course, you seem to forgotten everything about that :rolleyes2: Without any proper logic on physics, there is no argument- unless you can inspire me, I see ample boasting on your behalf but little credentials to back it up. As for your cheap shot at Shoji, it really proves your lack of knowledge, a typical amatuer who probably worships Macek's feet. What made Shoji a success was not just the fact that the VF design was nicely made, in all major aspects, the designs works with only exceptions of miniturisation of fusion engines and the increased computerisation of movements in Battroid mode.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
F-22's or the JSF can't do 2 G's without customisations and no armament
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

don't contradict yourself. "customisation" has been a large part of your quite pointless argument.

Well here's a good laugh, proves that you aren't as smart as you claim: here I pointed out that F-22's can't do anything like 2G's without assistance, thus proving that VF's can outmatch them with little difficulty. But you seem to have missed that- someone's getting increasingly very petty. :lol:

Oh yeah, your links are kind of skewed and aren't that credible.
Proven by this

"For the most part, the information in here follows the RPG, unless I totally disagree with what they did (an example of this is the Lancer Space Fighter. In the show, this is not a fighter at all, its a starship!)

Also, i've scanned in all of the pictures and coloured them myself. I have the whole series on video tape, and have gone over it rather closely, to get the colours as close as possible to the originals. However, if you feel that I have erred on something, feel free to send me email.

But, some of the items/mecha were never shown in the series, so I've just had to extrapolate, guess and just plain make stuff up. Again, if you don't agree with something, and have evidence to prove it, drop me a line."

I don't trust RPG sites, all customised/unofficial in certain ways- I can give you plenty of RPG Macross sites which would definitely give me unwarranted advantages, but I just need an official credible English site to do enough. You need to give me something of greater credibility.
I'm not a hypocrite on this matter- you didn't ask, you didn't recieve. Unlike a lot of the rubbish coming from you :rolleyes:
Well, the site I follow is the Macross Compendium.


By the way Steathassasn, you got a problem with my av??

[Steathassasn]

a problem with your av....hell no!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

VIRTUAL ON RULES

i personaly have a small modle of Reiden on my desk ..and get this ..

my sister has 4 Fei Yen modles...( 3 regular types and that one special cat type )

and a Armond( please excuse the spelling ) battler ( or was it striker...i forgot ...anyway its the one with the rocket launcher )

i love Reiden though..he maybe slow but if you set him up right...hes very powerfull

but back on topic...
Could i fit a ALpha fighter in my back yard ?

:: does barrel rolls and loops in his alpha :: i think im gona be sick :lol:

[Valkyrie]

"quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
: warplanes are compared to what's available; if the opponent doesn't have a better model it's obviously not superior on the grounds that it had less 'upgrades'.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

and as you have pointed out, mospeada and macross are along two different paths. the only reason that the valk is any better, is because macross went farther than the robotech series did. in macross, they stuck with the valk design. in mospeada, they went to the VAF design because it was superior to the valk design. the VF-1 is the basic valk design. But since the robotech series was cut short, the VAF wasn't given a chance to be improved like the VF design was.
and if i recall correctly, a panel of experts did say that the B-17 was the best bomber of the last century (it was on DWings, and i wasn't able to see the other types of aircraft, but this clearly shows that a plane doesn't even have to be close to modern to still be considered the best).... like i said previously -- "

Yes, good one- the reason why it was considered best for the century was due to the fact that bombers have only been around for about a century :rolleyes2: The B-17 was considered the best all round because of its impact in the war. Numbers and versatility in its combat role was superior than most other bombers during its period. The B-17 is certainly not better than any current bomber- even if you constatly 'upgrade' it would be of little consequence. You used slanted information and twisted it to suit your means- little else. If you go by that, the VF-1 is by far the better design as it was far more numerous and had a greater impact in its period. You just used logic from one side (the B-17 argument) and then applied my points (performance based) and slanted it to your twisted logic by saying VAF's had less models and better performance based on the timing and competing against an obsolete design. That shows down right hypocricy, sad to see you recriminate yourself.

Also just a slight note, your timeline for Robotech and the VAF is about 2047 while the YF-19 was made in 2039. Also note that the VF-11 is superior to your VAF and was made 14 years before the YF-19. Your VAF had plenty of time to catch up and supersede but obviously failed to do so. I guess another of your arguments bites the dust. So which design is better in terms of time?? I wonder... :rolleyes2:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Glad to see that you never fail to remind me how slow you are. You haven't seen Macross Plus or 7 to see how a VF-11 looks like but you have made up your mind up on the size: an F-14. If you've seen the VF-11 you'll note several differeneces other than your ignorant view of a VF-1.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

...fine, make it about 13 feet shorter and about half the wingspan of a f-14....

Well glad to see that you're still wrong about your points- you probably haven't even seen a VF-11 in combat have you??


Quote: "and i believe that i asked you not to reply if you didn't have anything constructive to say.....what you said was far from constructive...."

Really?? That most peculiar, let me point out a few interesting revelations that seem to be amiss:

You've been using my quotes in several occasions out of context, I on the other hand have used all your points on your previous points and quoted them in concise paragraphs.

I've stated main points on what I'm after: proving VF's are superior in all respects to VAF's and VBF's in combat. You on the other hand have used petty quotes and pick out usless details and conveniently leave out facts you either don't understand or that stand in your way of your view point. Such examples include your aversion to facts like reactionary weapons, physics theories in aerodynamics, VF history and the set basics of VF's and VAF's.

You not only show ignorant views, you constantly make mistakes on what you're talking about. You have been shown time and time again that your logic was flawed and have done little to rectify it. It's insulting to think I should drag myself into what can best be described as a spam match with you. If you don't really have anything properly based on the original topic other than your silly nit picking, why don't you spare the board one less spam?? But I guess you probably jump on the gun on this one as well and prove me right.

So who's really being constructive?? Guess it's not someone I know... :rolleyes2:

Well Stealth, VF's can fit in in your backyard if you have ample space in height (about 10 meters or so) and about 10-15 meters in diameter on the ground. VAF's are slightly smaller and heavier and thus should be able to fit with more or less difficulty. But I hope you know that VAF's have nothing to do with the Macross timeline.

Off topic, I play VO2 more than VO1 nowadays. Temjin used to be the VR I'd play in VOOM but in VOOT I'd go either Gry Vok or Temjin. I love the CYpher design though- so sleek and transformable like a VF :D

[sidewinder]

I've stated main points on what I'm after: proving VF's are superior in all respects to VAF's and VBF's in combat. welp, i'm back now.......and you are incorrect. you seem to want to state only flight performance. and it is obvious that there is more to a veritech than how well it can fly.
another thing you must take into consideration is how well do they perform against the enemy they are intended to fight. the shadow alpha is almost completely invisible to it's intended target(the invid)...what could be better than a mech your enemy can't even detect until it is too late???
This is rich, you claim to have seen the final battle of Macross Plus as well as other scenes, combined with your quote on "i know the important things, not trivial specs that only an engineer would care about...." and your statement that VF's only fire about 6-8 missiles seem to be lacking a few major points. don't be hypocritical. you are clearly misquoting me when it is plain to see that i was referring to the VF-1 of SDF Macross(considering that i did point out that i was referring to the VF from SDF macross).
by Steathassasn:
4) it comes ( in some models) with a cyclone ...extra plus i'm pretty sure it comes will all the alphas....most of the differences between them are just superficial....

and valkyrie...i did say that if you could provide me with a page that provides the specs for the alpha, i'd appreciate it... i have no idea where to find one so that is why i used a rpg site....mearly for reference however...... and unless you can provide such a site, you really can not prove your side....

furthermore, i'd like to see how a valk pilot would do in Scott's/Stick's place.

oops....got a class to go to now......

[Steathassasn]

yeah ..the cypher in VOOT is cool..i love flying around ...but it doesent last long .....i dont use him much cause i die too often...but whats strange is that my sister can kill every one in less than 30 sec. with Fei Yen ...its like...start...then ...you lose

[Valkyrie]

Man, is it just me or is it your posts keep getting more and more lost/dumber??

Quote: "welp, i'm back now.......and you are incorrect. you seem to want to state only flight performance. and it is obvious that there is more to a veritech than how well it can fly.
another thing you must take into consideration is how well do they perform against the enemy they are intended to fight. the shadow alpha is almost completely invisible to it's intended target(the invid)...what could be better than a mech your enemy can't even detect until it is too late??? "

Yes- that's a good one, bring another barb to sting yourself. An amatuer throwing everything he has to prove he has nothing. Now that you've conceded that VF's out do them in the air (if you haven't, then that's just a sad, you've proven nothing but a bad case of hot air). For one, fighter mode is amongst the most important- it's the fastest mode in which long range combat is preferred and by far safer. Fighter mode is safer also in terms of manoeuvres, dodging in fighter mode is far easier than any other thus avoiding destruction. Battroid mode is more defensive and for more upclose engagements. It's only major advantage is that its firepower can be directed far more easily beacause pivoting and swerving is far more flexible than the fighter mode can do. It also can take more damage as fighter mode is vulnerable around the wings in particular. But here's the jewel of this little argument: VF's in any mode outperform VAF's. I've actually got proof.


Designation: VF-6H
Mecha Class: Veritech fighter, aerospace capable.
Crew: 1 pilot.
Weight: 16.70 tons (dry)

FIGHTER MODE
Max speed at sea level: 1100 kph
Max speed at 10,000m: 1900 kph
Max speed at 30,000m: 3000 kph

GUARDIAN MODE

Max speed at low altitudes: 680 kph

BATTLOID MODE
Max speed at all altitudes: 312 kph
Max walking speed: 120 kph



RUNNING, SOLDIER CONFIGURATION:
120 mph (192 kmph)
LEAPING, SOLDIER CONFIGURATION:
50 ft (15 m) high or 70 ft (21 m) long without thrusters.
FLYING, GERWALK/SOLDIER CONFIGURATION:
Mach One (670 mph/1072 kmph) maximum speed limit in an Earth-like atmosphere. Can also hover in place indefinitely.
FLYING, FIGHTER CONFIGURATION:
Mach 3.5+ (2345 mph/3572 kmph) max speed at 10,000 meters or less above sea level. Mach 5.1+ (3417 mph/5205 kmph) max speed at 10,000-30,000 meters above sea level. Mach 24+ (16,080 mph/24,494 kmph) max speed at 30,000+ meters above sea level, for a maximum of 5 seconds. Cruising speed is usually Mach 1.8 (1206 mph/1837 kmph). The YF-19 is capable of achieving orbital velocity over an Earth-class planet without additional rocket assistance.


All I hear from you is that I'm incorrect- on what?? All you're points are baseless to say the least. Many are down right hypocritical: your argument about stats have been conveniently abandoned. I don't hear you talking quite so much about VAF's sleekness or their 'superior qualities'. Oh yeah, the YF-19 onwards have active stealth- thus rendering them invisible to anything electronic as well. Your stealth feature isn't anything special to me- I'd already had that in consideration. VF's can do better than your VAF's against anyone including the invid. Fat chance an Invid can detect a VF when they don't run on protoculture either.

Quote: " and valkyrie...i did say that if you could provide me with a page that provides the specs for the alpha, i'd appreciate it... i have no idea where to find one so that is why i used a rpg site....mearly for reference however...... and unless you can provide such a site, you really can not prove your side....

furthermore, i'd like to see how a valk pilot would do in Scott's/Stick's place. "

This is a good one: you want me to provide you your own defence in this debate. I provided my source, whether you looked into it or not is your problem. I've proven my case- but you obviously couldn't prove yours. Proves to me you're a tru amatuer because the information is there. If you don't bother searching yourself, I'm not going to spoonfeed you.

Well a valkyrie pilot could just use a fold unit and fold out appropriately. The UNSPACY was far more superior to anything the REF came up with so it's funny to think of such a situation for them to be in. I'd like to see the REF try beating the Protodevlin- nothing from the RT world can take them on: I'd dare you to try.

As usual, I didn't splice your arguments- not like you. You've constantly tried misconstrewed my statements and still got your facts all wrong. I'm not going to bother replying to an obviously petty ingrate when he can't provide me anything more worthy than the rubbish presented here. In other words, try giving me something worth talking about instead of your 'little pictures' of petty ignorance- something constructive .

[sidewinder]

This is a good one: you want me to provide you your own defence in this debate. I provided my source, whether you looked into it or not is your problem. I've proven my case- but you obviously couldn't prove yours. Proves to me you're a tru amatuer because the information is there. If you don't bother searching yourself, I'm not going to spoonfeed you. well it is obvious then, that you are only arguing with yourself. you instigated the argument by attacking my statement and not backing it up with any sort of relavence. you mearly state the performance of a valk, without showing any comparison to the alpha. i have nothing to prove. if you want to prove to me that the valk is truly better, then you must supply the evidence. otherwise, you are just blowing steam. and if you can truly back your claims, then you would be able to easily provide such information. all evidence from either party should be made available to the other. that is how such a thing works considering this is not an argument at all. i am certainly not going to put forth any effort into such a trivial argument. by mearly attacking my lack of effort in childishly arguing, you can not prove your point. i do not have to defend myself. if you want to attack me, then do so, but it means little if you only supply your facts and no others. and that is all you have done so far.
your example above highly confuses me...are you trying to compare the VAF to the VF-19??? if so, (first of all), it is not designated as a VF, and second, there is no H model. the running speed of VAF is 300 mph, your first example shows walking speed, while the second shows running speed....
Fat chance an Invid can detect a VF when they don't run on protoculture either. a very poor statement considering the invid were made to fight the REF forces and not UNSPACY...you can not compare two different "worlds" in such a fashion. they could have just as easily been made to detect a valk's fusion reactor.... it is like trying to compare pokemon to digimon(the best i can think of off hand, but it is a highly effective example)...you can't because they are two completely different worlds...a digimon can eat a pokemon alive, but they weren't made to be compared against each other.
your earlier time example is completely irrelavent. since they are completely different animes, you can't make such a poor comparison.
and i will say this again because it doesn't seem to sink into your thick skull. there is more to a veritech than how fast it can go. you seem to enjoy attacking my statements and then provide evidence after i have brought up the question. you are not trying to prove anything at all, you are mearly trying to disprove what i say. doing so proves nothing. you have handled this in a highly immature fashion. if you wanted to prove your point, you would have brought up all the points in the first place. i haven't been trying to prove a thing and obviously you haven't either. i didn't try to prove anything in the first place, so attacking my "poor" evidence is completely meaningless, when i'm not providing any. if you want to prove the valk is better then prove it! stop your petty idiocy and prove your point correct. otherwise just grow up and shut up.

[Valkyrie]

well it is obvious then, that you are only arguing with yourself. you instigated the argument by attacking my statement and not backing it up with any sort of relavence. you mearly state the performance of a valk, without showing any comparison to the alpha. i have nothing to prove. if you want to prove to me that the valk is truly better, then you must supply the evidence. otherwise, you are just blowing steam. and if you can truly back your claims, then you would be able to easily provide such information. all evidence from either party should be made available to the other. that is how such a thing works considering this is not an argument at all. i am certainly not going to put forth any effort into such a trivial argument. by mearly attacking my lack of effort in childishly arguing, you can not prove your point. i do not have to defend myself. if you want to attack me, then do so, but it means little if you only supply your facts and no others. and that is all you have done so far.
your example above highly confuses me...are you trying to compare the VAF to the VF-19??? if so, (first of all), it is not designated as a VF, and second, there is no H model. the running speed of VAF is 300 mph, your first example shows walking speed, while the second shows running speed...

Sad, sad loser: you can't defend yourself and I'm not going to debate on how stupid you sound. Your incompetence and amatuerish comments lack any sense in a debate- respect down (if it could go below what you are already). So if I follow your logic, when I'm a prosecutor in court- I have to provide the defendant a defence against my own strategy?? Sure dude, :rolleyes2: your ignorant selfish-righteous world of "I'm always right, I don't need to prove anything" seems to be showing here. So if you said you're a donkey we'd all believe you?? (Actually I would :lol: )
For one, you know barely anything about Macross, you ignorant fool. A VF-19 does exist- shows how much you know about your opposition. As for your own lack of knowledge about your own VAF's- that's a good laugh. You really want to continue your theory about the VAF H variant?? I promise it'll come back to bite you- such brash stupidity on your behalf is amusing. Then this statement about the lack of comparison that I presented: I gave you the facts which you can't accept because it obviously proves you wrong. You try to be petty by using sad little technicalities like "it said run while mine says walk"- get a grip kid. Maybe you should study at school a bit more. Running and walking at that pace is exactly the same: note that the VAF said max speed and the term walking is nothing more than a description of the action provided; not the indication of different max speeds on the ground- or why else put it there fool??
You obviously don't have the right facts about your own VAF- which is a really, really sad case. Making up facts as you go along is a really lousy and hypocritical- something I'm not surprised you'll stoop to. A basket full of what can be best described as crap from your posts bores me. I provided my link- I told you where to find it, if you can't, it proves to everyone that your incompetent- I won't spoon-feed you like what you've probably been treated at your school. I'm not going to coddle you just because you request it: you've failed to provide me anything substantial to even take on my first post on this issue.

But wait a minute!! This is exactly the same gest as my previous post :D which means only one thing- you can't hack real facts and you've been repeating yourself like a spoilt brat who can't accept reality: what a hypocritical loser. Doesn't it hurt when the real world doesn't conform to your demands/dreams kid??

You wonder why I haven't given you a direct link- well, it's become increasingly clear to me that you've been living on hearsay and one little site. You know little of both my areas and your own. So I'm giving you a chance look it up yourself- try to be more of a man, kid. If you still can't find the site (thus proving your nothing more than an insignificant upstart) then I'll provide you the link. You've been posting constantly on this thread which shows your free time, why not use it more constructively and learn something before opening your mouth and prove yourself more the fool. Because anyone going by this forum can see it's not me who's not presenting the facts- but you. If it's only you who can't see that- I guess you've got issues.

Hint of the week kid: try finding things from the original source. Maybe you can see a bit more than your little well of ignorance.

a very poor statement considering the invid were made to fight the REF forces and not UNSPACY...you can not compare two different "worlds" in such a fashion. they could have just as easily been made to detect a valk's fusion reactor.... it is like trying to compare pokemon to digimon(the best i can think of off hand, but it is a highly effective example)...you can't because they are two completely different worlds...a digimon can eat a pokemon alive, but they weren't made to be compared against each other.
your earlier time example is completely irrelavent. since they are completely different animes, you can't make such a poor comparison.

Invid were a fighting force before the REF was formed, fool. You don't even know the aspects of active stealth and yet you think engines can be detected?? Sorry to disappoint you, but fusion engines can't be detected like an energy source the Invid were designed for. If you did your physics, you'd know that a fusion engine produces water and nitrogen: there's plenty of that on Earth. Invid didn't detect fusion engines because they weren't operating on protoculture so your arguement on detection of fusion engines are baseless. Unless you like to make up what you want to believe- but that wasn't in the anime and thus irrelavant.
Here's a funny one: you say my example is irrelevant and yet you are so willing to compare VF's to VAF's?? You disallow facts because they don't suit you but you'd put your comparisons like B-17's and so on?? That's a laugh- you really are a liar and a hypocrite, you certainly aren't going to win any honesty award any time soon. :lol:

and i will say this again because it doesn't seem to sink into your thick skull. there is more to a veritech than how fast it can go. you seem to enjoy attacking my statements and then provide evidence after i have brought up the question. you are not trying to prove anything at all, you are mearly trying to disprove what i say. doing so proves nothing. you have handled this in a highly immature fashion. if you wanted to prove your point, you would have brought up all the points in the first place. i haven't been trying to prove a thing and obviously you haven't either. i didn't try to prove anything in the first place, so attacking my "poor" evidence is completely meaningless, when i'm not providing any. if you want to prove the valk is better then prove it! stop your petty idiocy and prove your point correct. otherwise just grow up and shut up.

Hehe touchy aren't we?? Seems to me somebody's taking it personally :rolleyes2: :lol: Not only can't you think intelligently, you can't read what's obviously on the screen. What was my previous post about?? I showed the facts on performance on all forms, not just fighter mode. You're VAF is still outperformed in all these areas. I included extra details about each mode in a paragraph for you to understand that each mode is important: especially fighter mode which you still fail to see. I already stated that each mode complimented each other but some with more regulated importance which you'd probably fail to see because your a blind RT fan. Funny too- you obviously don't know what thrust is: because I didn't just state speed, I added manoeuvrebility as well. You couldn't even compete with the weapons platform I briefly stated- again, totally ignoring points like reactionary weapons (which you conveniently avoided) and not even bothering to know your opponent before obviously making an utter fool of yourself. If you'd like to get me started on defensive scenarios like armour, you can be my guest. VF's would win this category as well. But since I've already shown VF's superior to VAF's in all the other areas, stating more detail would probably confuse your puny mind.
Your last paragraph makes an utter mockery of your ideals and points. Again, it's not me being hypocritical and being unconstructive, rather it's you once again :lol:
By simply expecting me alone to provide evidence is a laugh- once I do, you'd simply state that it wasn't fair because you weren't allowed to present your points. I give you the option to show me your data which you obviously can't provide but you stubbornly try to sound all innocent and clean with your lousy logic of "I don't need to prove a thing". It's becoming quite clear that it's not me that needs to prove a thing any more: I've stated facts and even showed it to the forum. You just gave a link which has changed facts. I'd only believe your RPG site if I bother to calculate the maths on speed at atmospheres: which I've done to both the official Macross site and a reliable Macross RPG one.
I gave you the option to actually do the reasearch instead of crapping on yourself with your repeated statements: again you stubbornly refuse. I guess it's you who's being petty, spamming on as usual and presenting little in content. I then presented facts: but you quickly disallowed them because they didn't suit you; so who's really been the fool- go figure :rolleyes2:

Maybe you're right, someone should shut up- it should be you. You're definitely not qualified for any physics award nor debating. Wonder do you hold any of those credentials?? Your being petty by picking small statements out of context: or can't your little mind see it?? It seems your the only one here who's so eager to make a little spam of pointless banter.

You wonder why I don't spare you any courtesy?? It's because you don't deserve it. I respect opinions and facts. You stated a wrong fact but still want to slug it out with me. You don't see me being rude to Steathassasn because he likes RT. I give respect where its due: why don't you try earning some because you certainly haven't got any. You don't state anything more than your opinions and expect me to take your word on it. You don't research or even know what your talking about but your limited knowledge of VF's and even your VAF's. So you do the math- or maybe you're still concentrating on that at school??

[sidewinder]

I gave you the option to actually do the reasearch instead of crapping on yourself with your repeated statements: again you stubbornly refuse. I guess it's you who's being petty, spamming on as usual and presenting little in content. I then presented facts: but you quickly disallowed them because they didn't suit you; so who's really been the fool- go figure no, i opted not to, simply because i don't have time for such foolish and ridiculous arguments and because i wasn't here to argue in the first place. your ignorant selfish-righteous world of "I'm always right, I don't need to prove anything" seems to be showing here. So if you said you're a donkey we'd all believe you?? i have never said anything like this. i have mearly pointed out that i'm not here to prove anything i say. you seem to only want to attack my statements and force me into an argument just so you can try to make yourself look better...and frankly, it hasn't. throwing insults at me shows exactly how intelligent you are...or, i should say, how not intelligent you are.
Sorry to disappoint you, but fusion engines can't be detected like an energy source the Invid were designed for. If you did your physics, you'd know that a fusion engine produces water and nitrogen: there's plenty of that on Earth. wow....that's informative.....i guess i really didn't know that afterall....
you say my example is irrelevant and yet you are so willing to compare VF's to VAF's?? You disallow facts because they don't suit you but you'd put your comparisons like B-17's and so on?? but as you can see, i am comparing the vehicles and not how their power sources deal in a completely different universe. you can't compare a b-17 against the VAF in the VAF's universe. so trying to compare a Macross VF to a VAF in the VAF's universe is equally stupid.
For one, you know barely anything about Macross, you ignorant fool. A VF-19 does exist- shows how much you know about your opposition. who's taking who out of context here? of course i know what the VF-19 is. where did you get that i didn't? You really want to continue your theory about the VAF H variant?? I promise it'll come back to bite you- such brash stupidity on your behalf is amusing. again with the insults? considering it is quite obvious that you don't understand what i was asking...i don't see any logic in comparing two VF's and trying to support your claims, so that first one must have been a VAF. however, there is no H model. if there is, well then i don't know about it, and therefore i haven't been advocating it. and it's rather cute that you have detail information about the 19 but not the other.....
You try to be petty by using sad little technicalities like "it said run while mine says walk"- get a grip kid. Maybe you should study at school a bit more. Running and walking at that pace is exactly the same: note that the VAF said max speed and the term walking is nothing more than a description of the action provided; not the indication of different max speeds on the ground- or why else put it there fool?? if it was a mere typing error, then i'll concede, but walking and running are not the same and any idiot can figure that out. haven't you ever heard of cruising speed? (obviously you have, so don't reply with a snide remark... i'm simple stating the difference between walking and running...putting down 'walking' speed can be denoted as cruising speed very easily. don't try to attack me with such foolish statements just because you made the error.)
You wonder why I don't spare you any courtesy?? It's because you don't deserve it. I respect opinions and facts. You stated a wrong fact but still want to slug it out with me. if you really respected opinions, then you would have quit your foolishness before it even started. i did not state any "facts" to begin with.
No offence sidewinder, but you really should look at the stats of your Legioss VAF-6 before making such claims. The VF-11 can out do you VAF and has far more versatility to match. The VF-11C full armour has at least as much if not more missiles than both the alpha and beta variants combine. Do you know how many G's it can pull?? Guess not. A VF-11 can do about 3 by itself without it's extra customisations. If just armed with standard ordinance and FAST pack equiped, it's about 5 G's. Don't go for a popularity contest, go for facts. that is what you said after i stated that i prefer the VAF. i then supported my statement with more opinions. but you proceeded to attack my opinions by denoting them as my "facts". you used skewed terms that confused more people than just me (death obviously thought the same as me when you used the term G's)...you try to attack my use of terminology, but it is quite clear that when i'm talking about a VF-1, i either call it that or i mention SDF Macross and when i'm referring to any other model, i call it a valk. you made generalized claims and then attacked my less generalized claims by saying you want specific numbers(the whole 200 missile incident), but never attempted to correct your own. it was quite clear that your generalization was further from the truth than mine.(yours was 78 missiles off, whereas mine was only 22)...and you attack me for not providing "facts"??? now who is really the hypocrit?

i am quite capable of having an intelligent discussion over this, and would go out of my way to research it if you'd just act intelligently, but you seem only to try to provoke me rather than being mature about this and have a good discussion.

ps - refrain from referring to me as 'kid'. that statement is bristling with pure ignorance so don't use it when you clearly don't have the "facts".

[Steathassasn]

omg...you two need a break..here..lets talk about which mecha has a "sporter look "

the alpha fighter...or the ajax fighter

[sidewinder]

er...sportier? and so that i'm not ridiculed, do you mean the AJACS attack helicopter? if so, then the alpha....although i like them both...

[Steathassasn]

yes..i do mean the AJACS helicopter ( sounds like a cleaner we have here in the states ..:lol:)

to bad the verticts ( dispite their advancements ) dont talk to the pilot...that would be funny as hell

i.e.

isamu-argh

YF-19- what the ---- do you think your doing, where did you get you pilots license..in a box of some overly sweatened cereal...argh...if i could pilot my self into a wall i would ..you dumb ass...forget it

: self destruct activated ::

isamu- huh!..

:lol: yeah..that would kick ass...maybe we should talk about the kawaii ness of the ALpha...more often :kawaii:

Mecha are kawaii too! :kawaii :

[sidewinder]

i think they should have taken the AJACS further (hmmm....does sound like dishwashing soap....)....i like the concept behind it, and i think more can be done with it...not the Logan however....cute, but it doesn't excel at anything.....what it can do can be done better by the cyclone or alpha.....

haha *points and laughs at isamu*

[isamudyson]

Originally posted by sidewinder


haha *points and laughs at isamu*

Hey! Careful where you are pointing.

[Steathassasn]

read my last post and you'll see why he's laughing ...muaghaa

heres another

::in the Hanger ::

Yf-19 : where the hell do you think your going ?

isamu - out

::Yf-19 Points a 35mm machine gun at isamu and starts firing ::

isamu- what the hell is your problem

yf-19- dance fool!...entertain me you worthless pathtic excuse for

pilot...

::isamu dances ::

( lol )

[sidewinder]

Originally posted by isamudyson


Hey! Careful where you are pointing. lol! er anyway....

the second one is ok, but i like the first one you did better...(Steathassasn)

[Steathassasn]

thank you..yeah the first one was better wasnt it

i duno..i was on a creative rush from something..that and fustrated by the lack of Jerry Springer threds made by Roin( i think thats how you spell it )

eh...when im feeling giddy again ill wright another one

[Steathassasn]

oh boy..im here again ..you know what that means :D

isamu- hum...:turns on his cd player and turns it on full blast ::

Yf-19- turn that ---- off

isamu- make me you stone age piece of junk

: the yf-19 does a free fall straight into the New Edwards runway..and stands on its nose for 5 secounds before falling over on the cockpit ::

Yf-19- hey...you dead?

isamu- no

yf-19- damn!

please..some one make one up...im not gona be doing this forever

[Rally]

SDF-1 robot mode ownz all! :D

[sidewinder]

@ valkyrie -- (after looking a few things up and organizing my argument...more or less....)

lol....how can you say that the VF-11 is better than the VAF-6/VF-6??? even dave deitrich says that if the 11 was in the robotech timeline, that it would be replaced by the alpha :lol:...(www.steelfalcon.com)
one thing that puts the VAF(i prefer the RPG designations and it just clears up who is being referred to) above the rest is simplicity of design. just compare its design to the VF-4 it replaced(among others...i'm just using the VF-4 because of its obvious non-simplistic design). not only is it better than the VF-4, it is also much simpler...the VF-11 is pretty much comperable to the VAF, but look how much simpler in design the VAF is...
the main thing that makes the VAF the best is its versitility...the VF-19 only carries 48 missiles to the VAF's 68(robotech.com confirms that there are in fact missiles on the head of the VAF). with extra hard points, they can each carry a total of 78 missiles(the 19 can carry up to 30 depending on missile type), but these "extra" missiles have to either be expended or ejected to convert to battloid mode. Additional fast packs or armor are needed to give a valk any sort of missile advatages. i will again state my "add-on" theory, but add to it. you are correct in saying that a gun pod may be considered an add-on, but when it is housed internally(as with the VAF) it is not an add-on. How versitile are your valkyries with these additions? not very. a VF is limited to specialized tasks with these additions, and must remove the add-on to perform other tasks well. a VF-11 in armor may be stronger than an alpha, and also have more missiles, but i'd be willing to bet that it can't outfly or outmanuever a VAF (just a hunch though...). the VAF's performance is greatly increased in every single area with it's only add-on. the thing that makes a VBF superior to armor and fast packs, is that it supplies both(armor and firepower) and the fact that it is a completely separate veritech. The VBF can go wherever the alpha needs to...if the VBF needs to separate from the VAF, it can still remain by the VAF's side and reattach later. try saying that about your fast packs and armor.
the cyclone. the VAF contains a cyclone armor for downed pilots. what does the VF have? a VAF pilot has a much better chance of survival due to the fact that he has a "back-up mech". although not a true mech, the cyclone does provide many of the benefits of one, while also providing many more that a destroid obviously lacks. not to mention that the pilot also has CVR body armor(obviously, if he wants to be able to use his cyclone, but i'm using it to pose the question of "what does the VF have?")
speed. you keep mentioning how the VF's speed is mostly superior to a VAF's (in flight mind you), but you fail to even consider one thing. speed means jack if you can't perform at it. it's like RAM in a computer...you can have as much as you want, but it is useless without a sufficient processor. the A-10 warthog(my personal fav out of modern day aircraft) crawls compared to something like the F-15, but how is it that it scored the most air to air kills out of any aircraft in the gulf war? i don't think speed was a big factor...not to mention that air to air combat is certainly not its primary role. even the VF-1 is faster than the VAF, but a VAF can take a VF-1 any day(yes, even on tuesdays). pure speed is only good for three things: running(away), getting from point A to point B in a hurry(if it is necessary), and closing distance between an enemy that has you in range while he's not in yours. speed(to a point) has little effect on actual combat performance. max speed is certainly not the same as combat speed(for lack of a better term), and should certainly not be held in higher regard (i may just be adding support to your argument, but i am pointing out why stating max speed proves little)...and for example's sake: a modern F-14 uses swing wings(obviously)...to attain max speed, it positions its wings all the way back, but for manueverability, it positions them all the way forward(quite obvious, but it also obviously defeats your max speed argument...in actual combat, fighters do not perform at top speed, because they can not manuever)
under-water mobility. one area that a veritech fighter excels at above most others(namely destroids), is performance under water. so how does a VF compare to a VAF? i'm not saying the VAF is any better(i may just be adding support to your side), i'm just pointing out another point of your argument you fail to include. This is definately an aspect that should be considered...it is irrelavent whether or not it is a primary function....
the VAF is able to do things that a VF can't do without additions, and even then, the VAF can accomplish tasks better that the VF(with it's additions) can not. The VF's additions make it excel in areas, but hinders it in others, whereas the VAF is only made better in every area by it's addition.
it is quite clear that the alpha is the more versitile veritech, therefore, it is the best.

refrain from making rash and immature comments, and argue objectively...you want an argument...well, you're gonna get it...and to clear things up, i now know what you are referring to when you state the 'H' designation...i have only known the rpg designations, and i prefer them for many reasons that i won't list because they are not relavent to the topic...also, there is no official VAF-7, it is the VAF-6S like i thought it was(according to robotech.com), so there actually haven't been any new models

@steathassasn
pretty funny stuff, post more if you come up with them....i don't think i can, so i'm not much help....

[Steathassasn]

aww...i got a fan...:D

thank you ..thank you all

im hoping some one will take some time to write one too

[sidewinder]

Originally posted by Steathassasn
aww...i got a fan...:D

thank you ..thank you all

im hoping some one will take some time to write one too i just find them amusing and slightly humorous....don't leave out guld....how bout doing one where he is going to ram the ghost fighter.....i'm sure the plane would have a lot to say about that....

[Steathassasn]

Originally posted by sidewinder
i just find them amusing and slightly humorous....don't leave out guld....how bout doing one where he is going to ram the ghost fighter.....i'm sure the plane would have a lot to say about that....

it sure would

Guld- looks like i have to pull out the limiter..a.

YF-22- what do you think your doing...

Guild- nothing

Yf-22- ooh..i see..sacrafice me to save your sorry Zentradi ass..So you can hook up with that bimbo am i right? thats ok i got something special for your ass..dont you worry...

: the yf-22 ejects guld..switchs to battolid mode..grabs him and kicks him higher into the atmospher..then deals with the ghost fighter ..blowing it away...then it proceeds to watch guld free fall

a cloud of dust rising upon guld's impact ::

yf-22-..what you think im stupid...what a baka ::the yf-22 steps on guld.and looks at its "foot"::

eww...::it scrapes the battered guild off of its "foot" with its rifle and heads towards UNSPACY HQ::

i got something for those bastards too ::swinging its gun in the air ::

[sidewinder]

hehe....there are many things that could be done with that scene....these could make very interesting short comic strips hehe....very interesting indeed....

[Steathassasn]

ahh..you flater me ...im doing this because of the sever lack of Jerry Springer Threads...omg..where are they : cries:

so i make the cast of Macross pay

isnt that nice :D

[MauveVandal]

I'm sort of new to this section (I should stick to my Gundam debating) so please disregard anything I say, I've only seen Macross 2 and Macross Plus so I've seen very little. I like the YF-19 and YF-21 it reminds me of the testing of the US' YF-22 Raptor (the winner!) and the YF-23A Black Widow II, Guld probably gave the stiff finger :finger: before he died. The YF-19 has an inetestring wing design, but I just don't care much for two engine, two seater aircraft probably because I'd be a lone flyer.

[thedarkmarine]

I think the YF-21 and 22 was copied from the Black Widow. The VF-11 is very Russian, maybe Su-27. As for th YF-19, my fav, I have no Idea of where they got that from. The nose looks Russian but other than that, nothing. However, the transformation is very similar to the VF-11.

Here's my question, where does the YF-21 store it's rifle/gunpod in fighter mode? Can someone supply some pictures?

[Steathassasn]

try the YF-21vs yf-19 thread ..lots of stuff there by sidewinder and valkerie and what not

:D

[MauveVandal]

Originally posted by thedarkmarine
I think the YF-21 and 22 was copied from the Black Widow. The VF-11 is very Russian, maybe Su-27. As for th YF-19, my fav, I have no Idea of where they got that from. The nose looks Russian but other than that, nothing. However, the transformation is very similar to the VF-11.

Here's my question, where does the YF-21 store it's rifle/gunpod in fighter mode? Can someone supply some pictures?

The YF-19 with its "delta wing" design looks kinda like an SU-47, but only the way the wings are, it shares no other characteristics with it.

[Steathassasn]

Am i the only one who thinks the alpha figher in gerwalk mode is kawaii ?

[sidewinder]

Originally posted by Steathassasn
Am i the only one who thinks the alpha figher in gerwalk mode is kawaii ? no you aren't

[Steathassasn]

good for a moment there i thought i was going crazy...maybe they should make a alpha gerwalk plushie

:D

[sidewinder]

Originally posted by Steathassasn
good for a moment there i thought i was going crazy...maybe they should make a alpha gerwalk plushie

:D lol....i still want one of these http://www.menet.umn.edu/~ngo/alpha_red.html

[Steathassasn]

if it was blue i would want one too

[Hiigaran]

The YF-19 looks frighteningly similar to the new S-37 fighter being made by Sukhoi. Though it was only revealed a few years ago, somehow the people who made Macross Plus seem to have known what it would look like heh.

*searches for a handy dandy picture link*

*finds handy dandy link*

It's codename is Berkut, it has a forward swept wing design and thrust vectoring technology, making it possibly the most nimble aircraft in the skies.

http://www.russian.ee/~star/air/russia/s-37.html

[sidewinder]

Originally posted by Steathassasn
if it was blue i would want one too
*cough* "the blue one" (http://www.menet.umn.edu/~ngo/alpha_blue.html)

[sidewinder]

Originally posted by Hiigaran
The YF-19 looks frighteningly similar to the new S-37 fighter being made by Sukhoi. Though it was only revealed a few years ago, somehow the people who made Macross Plus seem to have known what it would look like heh.

*searches for a handy dandy picture link*

*finds handy dandy link*

It's codename is Berkut, it has a forward swept wing design and thrust vectoring technology, making it possibly the most nimble aircraft in the skies.

http://www.russian.ee/~star/air/russia/s-37.html lol...that looks like a F-15(rear end), X-29(the wings duh), and panavia tornado(front end) combined....with the exception of the canard wings though...but that hardly looks like a fifth generation fighter...

[Hiigaran]

It's as close as you get when considering modern day aircraft bub.

[thedarkmarine]

Hiig, sorta...but...meh.

Lets just hope that the Russians have also picked up on Japanese Media :D.

[death]

no... I hope they do... Cause themn we could steel their tech!

[Hiigaran]

I have this feeling that there are probably a few reasons no one steals the design of japanese mecha like the YF-19....but maybe thats just me.

Anywho, as I said, the S-37 is about as close as you'll get to the YF-19 when talking modern military aircraft. You find one that looks more like it and I will bow to your magnificence. I think what you could do was have a SU-37, with forward swept wings, and that would look even closer to the 19, but of course that plane doesn't exist.

[Hanamichi]

Originally posted by Hiigaran
I have this feeling that there are probably a few reasons no one steals the design of japanese mecha like the YF-19....but maybe thats just me.

Anywho, as I said, the S-37 is about as close as you'll get to the YF-19 when talking modern military aircraft. You find one that looks more like it and I will bow to your magnificence. I think what you could do was have a SU-37, with forward swept wings, and that would look even closer to the 19, but of course that plane doesn't exist.

Yup that's correct considering the fact that some VF's & YF's have similarity to real planes..like just what you have said. :nod:

[Steathassasn]

so..what what plane is the ALpha simular to ?

[death]

Its not.

You realy couldn't get it off the ground

[sidewinder]

Originally posted by death
Its not.

You realy couldn't get it off the ground :confused: ....er, are you refering to the alpha??? if so, then i don't see where you get that idea :confused2

[Steathassasn]

ive seen short VTOL planes that look simular to the alpha..and dont forget the f-16....

but so far i cant find anything that looks remotely like an alpha fighter :bawling: guess i have to make one

[death]

sorry i meant the combine...

[Valkyrie]

Well well, it's about time you actually tried use some logic in your arguments- you might actually earn some respect from me. Pity there's still plenty of skewed data ande missing factors that you conveniently left out. Took you that long to acutally do some research??
Funnier yet, it's hypocritical for you to say you have no time for it and then chat to stealthassn on the same day for so long when the data is collectable in less than 5 minutes on google.

For one, you used comments from his RPG site: not fact from the official site. Pity you didn't tell everyone that FICTIONAL BACKGROUND FOR ROBOTECH CAMPAIGNS and thus doesn't steal the limelight from the main designs within the original series. You don't follow official sites, but less credible ones: and using only the facts that aren't related to the official site to support your case.
So if I make my own fan site, shove it with stats that make VF-1's better than your VAF's, I'm now right then?? Yeah, can see the logic in that kid.
To make matters worse, if you look at the stats like speed, production lines and versatility, it's clearly the better of the two- or did you just take someone's word for it but forget to actually back it up?? So your idea of following what is favourable to you only doesn't quite work at all.

As for your next comments about simplicity of design... what a load of rubbish!! Looks have nothing to do with performance: obvioulsy someone's not telling the truth about impartialty here... no logic whatsoever. Just because something looks more advanced, it's not so good?? So a gun isn't as good as a butter knife in combat due to its lack of simplicity :rolleyes2

You then begin trying to refer to your precious RPG stats because you don't really know much else about the official ones: a blantant attempt to hide the fact that you know little facts about the real design: your design that you're trying to prove is better. With a statement like this:

"however, there is no H model. if there is, well then i don't know about it, and therefore i haven't been advocating it."

And taking 5 days to research it and backing down isn't much in terms of credibility. Your the one that wants to contest on the facts that I've provided which are credible and double-checked by others?? Not only that, you want discount my facts and claim yours are better?? For what- because the didn't suit your point of view.

Shows that you don't know your facts well enough but still want to try and tell me I'm wrong?? Right... at least I know my facts from and for both sides.

You like to add on my theory about add-ons... well does the gun on your VAF hand-held?? Since it is, it's definetly an add-on. Since you don't know what an add-on obviously is, I guess I have to deliberate on your flawed thinking: an add-on is whatever that wasn't part of the mecha in it's production, anything like the hand-held pulse cannon is an add-on. If it isn't housed/operates within the mecha's body frame at all times, it's an add-on. Pity you don't say that the YF-19 has lasers and several other features that outguns your VAF without even needing FAST packs. So your theory about superior armament is just a lie: care to counter reactionary weapons as well??

Your VAF doesn't even have a Pin Point Barrier System (PPBS) to protect itself from obvious disadvantages in terms of firepower and performance.

How versitile are your valkyries with these additions? not very. a VF is limited to specialized tasks with these additions, and must remove the add-on to perform other tasks well. a VF-11 in armor may be stronger than an alpha, and also have more missiles, but i'd be willing to bet that it can't outfly or outmanuever a VAF (just a hunch though...). the VAF's performance is greatly increased in every single area with it's only add-on. the thing that makes a VBF superior to armor and fast packs, is that it supplies both(armor and firepower) and the fact that it is a completely separate veritech. The VBF can go wherever the alpha needs to...if the VBF needs to separate from the VAF, it can still remain by the VAF's side and reattach later. try saying that about your fast packs and armor.

Well here's a bit of ignorant self-assumptions if I ever saw one. VF's are more versatile than your VAF: they're faster, more manoeuvreable, better firepower and can escape the atmosphere by itself without needing an additional mechanical design to assist it. But in the Macross universe it competes against superior numbers and superior firepower, thus to save pilots, they use FAST packs to equal up the odds with their superior weapons. Your VAF's have already been proven to be less manoeuvreable and has less firepower as it is. You talk about your VAF and the VBF: two designs combined while my older VF-11 alone can equal it in terms of firepower and can detatch from its extra armour to be like it was in the original mode without add-ons: obviously someone didn't see all of Macross, if even half.

You then state Cyclones- another mecha design by itself trying to combine with a VAF, which has to combine with a VBF to out gun a VF. Hmmm... sounds like a lot of mecha to place against 1 VF in combat. Like I've stated before, VF's and their ships have such a high survivability rate with their superior weapons and tactics, they don't need things like Cyclones. Their tactics have proven in the Delta War and Varauta War to regard such devices as impractical. If they were marooned, they'd most likely be dead with or without cyclones. If an opponent can take out a VF which has a PPBS, hypercarbon alloys, anti-laser shileding and firepower of a small cap ship: a cyclone is an insignificant and expensive toy that only marginally increases a very small survivability percentage. Cyclones are very insignificant... do you see downed pilots now given state-of-the-art sniper rifles or assault weapons?? It increases their survivability a bit more... but no, their not given such expensive equipment- impractical. Just like your view of how cyclones are going to make your little team better than 1 VF.

Your issue with speed itself is amusing: guess you don't know much about air-combat . For one thing, speed is a big factor combined with several other factors: firepower, manoeuvrebility, stealth and avionics. Proven already, the VF has superior manoevurebility and thus can change direction quickly against in coming fire or being out-turned. Your idea of being better in combat is proven wrong: you can't outmanouvre a VF, it out performs you, it has superior weapons and yes, better defence:
Many VF's have PPBS to block your weapons: what can you say to that??
So what can you say, if speed's not a major problem in your eyes, what can your VAF's do when facing a design that out paces and out turns you?? Any strategy to that?? Not to mention a VF-1 can just snipe you to pieces by using hit and run tactics (which you can't do much about since you've conceded they're faster than your VAF's) going high forcing VAF's up, get out of Earth's atmosphere and blow you away while you can't reach those levels ... right, what can you do to counter such a simple strategy??

Your rubbish about manoeuvrebility has already been proven wrong: it's the ability to change a force of a vector in another direction which defines manoeuvrebility. Faster you are, the harder it is on the grounds of F=ma. However, if you have a high force of F, and low m, direction is easily changed. Considering a VF is lighter than a VAF, that isn't much of a problem when its top speeds and thrust prove the acceleration can easily manoeuvre past your VAF.

Your ideas on VAF's being better than a VF in combat is hardly accurate let alone right when you fail to mention or even recognise such simple matters as physics.

You want to bring up under-water combat?? Well, since VF"s already out do VAF's in space, ground and the air, they have to try something more interesting. Firstly, Macross doesn't conventionally use VF's in water missions and like destoids, use other Variable designs more suited to water areas. But that hardly detracts the obvious flaws in your arugment. For one, a submarine is built to be smooth to move cleanly in the wather: VAF's are bulky and blocky in design: drag compared to a smoother designed VF.
By being faster, a VF proves to be more powerful in terms of engine strength. Thus it can manoevure and speed up better than your VAF. Weapons platforms for boths sides aren't really available so I can't say much about superior weaponry under water since missiles are replaced with the unknown varibable like the torpedo. But VAF's don't have a PPBS for defence, doesn't seem to be likely to survive too long under deep water due to air for pilot and design specifications. VAF's would normally be under water in shallow area under a kilometer deep. Thus VF's can just simple attack VAF's from the surface with reactionary styled weapons or particle weapons.

Saying a VAF is more versatile is just a disdainful way of forgetting what versatility is. For one, a VF by itself can go on air, land, and space. A VAF can only go in air and ground. It needs at least a VBF to go in space; two mecha designs to do what a VF does normally in an Earth-like atmosphere. Yet you cry foul about haing something smaller and more effiecient like FAST packs which planes like an F-15 has. A VAF can't be more versatile when it can't outperform a VF in combat roles and can't even escape Earth's atmosphere to do space combat. Versatility?? Hardly... if your rational, you'd see that calling a VAF versatile ringing rather hollow.

You also claim the logic behind why the Invid wouldn't be able to take on VF's is amusing. Considering that RT basically copied Macross and Messopoedia, they're similar in everything except new alien life forms and protoculture. Since Invid are biologically atuned to an energy source that VF's don't have, it's an easy and totally logical reason to say that Invid couldn't detect energy signals of VF's when they also have active stealth capabilities. It's your lack of reasoning that seems to inhibit such clear and simple thought.

Facts of the day: an old VF-11 against the best RT can offer, the VAF-6Z: you be the judge of who's the better performer.

Note: VF-11 stats are from steelfalcon.com, relatively accurate to the official site (off by .5 or so km hand checked by a trusty calculator)
VAF-6Z from RT official site.

VF-11
RUNNING, SOLDIER CONFIGURATION:
90 mph (144 kmph)
LEAPING, SOLDIER CONFIGURATION:
30 ft (9 m) high or 50 ft (15.2 m) long without thrusters.
FLYING, SOLDIER CONFIGURATION:
300 mph (480 kmph) maximum speed limit in an Earth-like atmosphere. Can also hover in place indefinitely.
FLYING, GERWALK CONFIGURATION:
Mach One (670 mph/1072 kmph) maximum speed limit in an Earth-like atmosphere. Can also hover in place indefinitely.
FLYING, FIGHTER CONFIGURATION:
Mach 3.5+ (2345 mph/3752 kmph) max speed at 10,000 meters or less above sea level. Mach 8.2+ (5494 mph/8790 kmph) max speed at 10,000-42,000 meters above sea level. Max altitude of 42,000 meters without rocket booster assistance. Maximum rate of ascent is 28,500 meters/minute. G limits are +22 to -14.5 standard Earth gravities.
MAX ENGINE THRUST:
28,000 kg x2 from main engines, plus 10,000 kg x4 from optional super booster units or 120,000 kg x2 from optional solid-fuel rocket boosters.


Designation: VF-6Z
Mecha Class: Veritech fighter, aerospace capable.
Crew: 1 pilot.
Weight: 16.70 tons (dry)

FIGHTER MODE
Length: 10.25m
Height: 4.60m
Wingspan: 8.20m
Max speed at sea level: 1200 kph
Max speed at 10,000m: 2050 kph
Max speed at 30,000m: 3250 kph

GUARDIAN MODE
Length: 8.00m
Height: 5.72m
Width: 4.84m
Max speed at low altitudes: 775 kph

BATTLOID MODE
Depth: 5.25m
Height: 8.75m
Breadth: 4.84m
Max speed at all altitudes: 368 kph
Max walking speed: 140 kph

Considering I could have used a VF-19 or VF-22, a VF wouldn't lose to a VAF in a 1-on-1 situation and can easily hold its own when outnumbered.

Unless you can dispute any further, VF's can are clearly better: in spite of your statements.

[Steathassasn]

but is it more kawaii ?....i think not :lol:

thats right i am the village idiot of this fourm..:lol:

Mecha are Kawaii too!! :D

[sidewinder]

holy crap, i didn't think you were coming back in this thread.....i've been gone for the summer, so if you wish to resume the argument, then by all means, do..... and for future reference, this is a argument about which VF is better, not about how they'd do in a one on one battle. also, i'd like to point out that an earlier statement by you was only a half truth...you compared the VF-6H with the VF-19, and stated that the VF-19 was superior (in speed) in all modes....that may be true, but you failed to point out that the VF-6Z is, in fact, a later model with improved engines....if you're going to spout statistics, then make sure you use the right ones. i'll be back later with a much longer post...

[Valkyrie]

What a laugh: you're back and wrong as ever- before you try and argue, check your facts: I've given you perfect sources and you've shown your folly by not acting upon them. I showed you the crappy VF-11 to your VF 6Z. Where did you make up your garbage??

I also stated it can beat your VAF in all levels: also capable of taking on mulitple VAF's on its own. If you fail to even know your own facts and read clearly, your just lost.

Why don't you stop trying to be self-righteous and maybe look at what you're doing?? You haven't shown anything worth reading in this post and your previous ones reak hypocicy...eg. a VAF being better because its a simpler design.

If you really want to make a fool out of yourself, go ahead. I expect a debate where one knows what he or she talks about- not lousy assumptions or lying.

[Valkyrie]

and for future reference, this is a argument about which VF is better,

Normally, I'd edit a post but in this case, I'll post so as to prove I never edited or tried to hide anything. Firstly, the argument you're trying to win is what's better: a VF or your VAF.

and for future reference, this is a argument about which VF is better, not about how they'd do in a one on one battle

So let me get this straight, a VF isn't better than a VAF even if the VF can beat it in basically every situation bar ridiculous numbers??

So beating a rival in every possible situation means he/she is still better than you. Right..... good one kid :rolleyes: Guess a contestant in the olympics when he/she gets last should get the gold medal :lol: and you wonder why I have little respect for you in terms of your logic and facts. For another, look closely at my last post. Are you too much of a fool not to notice that an old design like a VF-11 is still better than your state-of-the-art VAF-6Z??

It's also a good idea to look at the replies that I've given you. Each one of them have far more content than any of your posts added together. I didn't want to make you look the fool, but the moment you posted this ridiculous reply you showed everyone here your folly.

[sidewinder]

okay, let's get things straight. you said a VF (i will use 19 for now on) can beat a VF-6 in a one on one fight, and you specified no parameters. it would be fairly easy to construct a fighter whos only purpose is to beat the VF-19. does this make the VF-19 inferior? certainly not, since the VF-19 is likely to be the better all around fighter of the two.
What a laugh: you're back and wrong as ever- before you try and argue, check your facts: I've given you perfect sources and you've shown your folly by not acting upon them. I showed you the crappy VF-11 to your VF 6Z. Where did you make up your garbage?? you're arrogance has no bounds, why don't you think about what you are saying before you call someone a fool and prove yourself a fool. i stated that you compared the VF-19 to the VF-6H...if you'd look back a few pages, you'd see exactly where you made this argument (try page 4, reply 5)

you ridicule