Download War Robots for free on your mobile device wrrbts.com/matsimus New players will get an armed robot with a unique skin, 100 gold and 50,000 silver. First 1000 players will also get an extra-bonus: HARD FLAMETHROWER “Ember”. Hurry up!
For me If there is no monster or what so ever Pacific rim or strongest transformers of soviet empire Will be verry alarming on us unless They can build strongest robot from the allies of it
In my opinion speed/mobility is the most important factor for a mech. It allows you to dictate the pace of the battle. You can engage or retreat at your own leisure. Modern armor(such as tanks) operate under the mindset. Don't be detected If detected, don't be acquired If acquired, don't be hit If hit, don't be killed I smaller profile has served tanks well, so too it would serve mechs as well. The bigger your mech, the bigger a target it creates and is slower. Something along the lines of a mobile suit/Gundam where mobility and maneuverability comes first, then firepower and armor.
Wait, how did you get Steel Battalion Heavy Armor to even work? Everyone I heard of who tried it couldn't get the Xbox Kinect to even remotely function properly basically rendering the game unplayable.
Honestly, if they could develop an exoskeleton for the soldier that would allow him to carry all of his kit and enable the soldier to run a 3-minute mile for a few hours, that would be a great Mech in my eyes.
And once the equipment are to handle with muscle power it doesn't matter how physically strong the pilot are. The absolutely weakest soldiers vould be lugging around the heaviest equipment. Besides they probably be small sized as well to fit better into a cramped cockpit. That is unless it is remote controlled or a robot.
Personally, I think the failure is that most scifi seem to want to use mechs as a replacement for Tanks I personally would think that Mechs would be a replacement/enhancement of Infantry. They'd be like a return of Heavy Infantry
@@accountname9506 I think he's referring to the fact that in battletech dispite mechs being the main fighting force in alot of conflicts tanks and infantry are still used and skilled commanders have been able to destroy entire units of mechs with infantry and tanks.
Experiments with small walking robots to transport equipment have been going on for several years now. Going from that I can definitly see a walking weapon platform being used down the road, especially as an non line of sight fireing missile launcher.
You might want to check out an anime called Obsolete. They're not the big stompy or super agile, but some where in between. It shows them how I would imagine a suit of powered armor to be armed and armored.
Dunno if it's been mentioned, but Metal Gear Rex is described in game as intended to be a "nuclear mobile artillery platform." It wasn't designed to be a battlemech to go fight other mechs, but to be capable of multiple nuclear strikes via the rail gun, while being entirely self sufficient and hard to find by operating in extremely remote areas.
That's actually what makes the Metal Gears work with me. They have extremely fine-tuned mobility and armor just for that purpose of acting as a nuclear submarine, but on land.
@@Y2KGMR I'd say alot of metal gears have anti air capabilities, it's just not their speciality. They'd most likely be supported by anti air turrets. Or they'd end up getting a anti air gun or two attached to handle it themselves.
Metal Gear Ray, on the otherhand, can be considered as a battlemech. It was designed to fight other Metal Gears, or at least to countermeasure against Metal Gear Rex.
Video title: "What kind of Battle Mech's make sense for modern warfare" Me: "Oh cool, Matsimus will delve into the realities of warfare to theorize what a real battle suit might end up looking like" Video is actually just a top 10 list where Matsimus tells us what he likes about all of the best known sci fi walkers. Me: "Cool, I learned nothing."
@Zorro Laplaya When talking about multi story high walking tanks like in Mech Warrior, I would agree. But I still see potential for human sized armored exoskeletons. A mech suit loses it's usefulness the moment the human pilot is unable to walk around in it as if they were strolling down the street. The point is to make something as tough as an armored vehicle but as agile as a single soldier. If that can't be done, there is no point to a mech suit.
@@chappy0061 Also i can imagine that a tank with eight well armored relaitve short leg with the ability to drop the damaged leg is less vulnerable to lose mobility than tracks ...on the other hand mud exists......
@@theMPrints 1. You missed the point of my comment entirely. 2. Not everything with armor plating is designed to compete with a tank. 3. Soldiers walk in mud just fine.
@Zorro Laplaya The closest you can get is 'mini-mecha' or power armor, and honestly, I think those roles are looking increasingly like they will be fulfilled by drones of various designs. Some of those drones may even be much bigger than a human (though certainly smaller than most vehicles) and have legs, but the giant robot concept will have come full circle to its early origins with the 'operator' giving instructions from the outside.
@@theMPrints The question is . . . What are the engineering tradeoffs. For instance, while can imagine a bank of short stumpy legs with only a few degrees of freedom each being able to propel a metal box, I doubt any such set of legs is going to be able to keep up with tracks in terms of mobility. MBTs are in fact capable of surprising clips of speed over rough terrain for something weighing over fifty tons. You might say these legs would give it better traverse over very rough terrain but like . . . The problem tanks have with rough terrain is frequently the same one a mecha would have. Namely driving across a hazard that tips them or otherwise causes the vehicles own weight to damage itself. If anything the tank is less vulnerable to unstable footing and most of the places a mech can traverse but a tank can't would realistic see the mech gambling with every step.
I think that would be the best use for them as they first start rolling out as they will be very expensive to service and procure since it will all be new technology. A major point when drawing up the mech doctrine is that everyone will know where to shoot, the legs/joints as they are under constant pressure so a couple of high caliber shots in the correct area can bring the whole $15 Mil (for ex procurement number) mech crashing down. I however think that militarized mechs are feasible in today's world as there are mechs that can move independently( the one in S Korea) that can be adapted into a supportive or combative role. The major question is what armaments will it have and how will the weight be distributed if x weapon system is implemented. Because if they are used like artillery platforms like ACE1918 said, then I think a 4 or 6 legged configuration will have to be chosen with anchor mechanisms in the hind legs to help mitigate the recoil. Another question is will it be auto loaded like the Archer artillery system or will it be manually loaded. I think it will be similar to the Archer where there is an autoloader that is preloaded before a combat mission so that the mech can shoot and scoot with minimal crew. Another benefit to this is that the artillery piece can shoot a much bigger rd as the preloading is most likely going to be done with the help of heavy machinery.
Nah our wheeled/tracked SPAAs can move faster and can carry heavier guns since its center of mass is low. I'd say mechs would be urban infantry support since they can carry heavier weapons and move faster than regular infantry. If a mech was in an open field, it would absolutely get slaughtered.
ground pressure would be too high. Combat tanks have ground pressure lower than infantry. www.mathscinotes.com/2016/06/tank-track-ground-pressure-examples/ I see mechs used for moving heavy loads, or on Navy carriers to load aircraft with lower personnel requirements. Wheeled and tracked vehicles are faster than walkers. Wheeled vehicles are in vogue right now because of the mobility advantages it has in countries with extensive road networks.
Honestly something like the Catapult would be best, a walking missile platform that wanders into positions, crouches down, then launches missiles like the javelin.
i think mechs would excel in occupation roles, eg walking around some city (Probably in the middle east, lets be honest) looking mean and offering a high vantage point from which to see,
The main weakness of our modern tanks and probably the area where bipedal mechs would shine is planetary exploration. In an uninhabited planet, roads do not exist. Tanks or pretty much any of our vehicles cannot function properly on super uneven terrain. They can flatten it, but if there were hostiles constantly breathing down their neck, it would be next to impossible to do any construction. Aside from that, bipedal mechs are useless and this hurts for a mech fan like me to say T.T
I'm so shocked they still haven't made a BattleTech movie. I feel like the audience is definitely there and you have a franchise that dates back to the 80s but is still going strong. War Robots and other current gen media would definitely draw other fans
@MoonDevoured There are no film makers willing to go and delve into the truth of the Battletech Universe. I mean really. They could make an entire show just based on the political backstabbing alone.
A big BIG real world reason there hasn't been a Battletech movie or series, is the nightmarish morass of legal issues. The Battletech franchise is not owned by just one company, different parts of it are owned by several different companies all at once and trying to get the rights to a movie or series would be a massive pain. That said, there WAS a Battletech Saturday morning cartoon series from the 90's, which was posted to TH-cam in HD by Renegade HPG
Mechs are great only if they have - Mobility - Armor against infantry weapons and countermeasures - Bigger than a human but smaller than a main battle tank - Firepower that can engage different types of threats - And melee combat
The Metal Gear really isn't meant to engage in normal combat, the massive railgun is meant to launch nuclear payloads at other countries without being detected. The other weapons it carries are just for self-defense.
@Bob Dole I meant, not sit there and fire at range like tanks, they fill fundamentally different roles, metal gears are meant to launch nukes at countries.
@Bob Dole It uses electromagnetic rails to launch a nuke so that nations cannot detect it. They gave it legs so that it could be very maneuverable and get to places extremely quickly.
@Bob Dole What do you mean, of course, it has guns, a laser, and multiple other weapons to engage ground targets, but that is a secondary role, and those weapons are only meant to defend themselves if caught during solo missions. Go and read the description first before arguing. And the Metal Gear Ray was designed to destroy Metal Gears.
I couldn't be more annoying even if I was given a fork, a ceramic plate, & 2 pairs of speakers at 3 a.m. monday. Good job Bob!! You won the internet...
The Goliath from StarCraft looks the most practical to me. It's pretty much designed not to be like a tank and really fits in perfectly in the support role. Two 30mm autocannons and SAMS is good enough to deal most light threats and it's pretty mobile to boot. I wish there were variations of it like a dedicated flak variant or an AT variant with long range cannons. That would be cool.
Yeah Goliaths are pretty much the limit to size and armament a mech can have before it stops being useful and just becomes an intimidation stunt like the ridiculously oversized Ratt. All a mech needs is to be a mobile elevated weapons platform and little more. As long as it can fill that role, it can leave all the heavy lifting to the tanks while it covers blind spots.
@Ž Š Four legged designs tend more awkward to work with but the Dragoon is certainly more low profile. You could probably outfit it with a mortar and it would be fine.
I can't stop thinking about CarBot's animations of Goliaths, where they appear to be constantly losing balance and just shooting all over the place once their guns actually fire. yet somehow they blow combatants up.
i think the only realistic mech suit would be roughly 14 feet tall, and our arms and legs would have to go into the mechs arms and legs, almost like an oversized iron man suit, i think anything bigger then that would be useless, or would have to have a force field
I really like how Respawn back in the day explained how Titans came to be. Their explanation of Titans being the current point in a gradual evolution of powered exoskeletons rather than the result of a project specifically to create mechs feels more natural, somehow.
@@sumotacular3681 taking into account we barely have the technology to make mechs and we already created two very basic prototypes i think it makes perfect sence that someone would try to create their own mechs once the technology is there
@@sumotacular3681 Battletech explanation is the best. It was result of scam, powered by megalomaniac what just happen to work. Largely due to combination of few rational technologies (primarily powerful artificial muscle, what make Mech mostly an armatur and can't be effectively used for rotation, so tanks). And tanks actually still can kick ass, but due to logistic bottleneck with FTL, it is commonly easier to move few giants, then tank battalion.
@@carso1500 I'm fairly sure first Spider Tanks are already in development. It is only matter of time when tech from NASA's ATHLETE, would be utilized in UGV's such as MULE.
"A titan would be pointless in combat cause it would not be able to handle the weight its pulling around..." This mans faith in the tools of God-Emperor is heretical!
The heritic understands not the wonders of the Omnissiah, the blessing of his protection via the void sheild, the holy hum of gravity feild generators the burning heart of the machine spirts plasma reactor. The god engines of the emperor of mankind bring woe to worlds, all quake in its steps, other tanks an mechs are mere specks, let its hellstorm cannons sing in jubilant praise as it brings the end of the heritics days.
Funnily enough this is how Ork Gargants work. You kill enough orks and their Gargants start being crushed by their own weight because there is not enough reality warping juice around to compensate for that.
You should look at the 1st generation APU from The Animatrix. It has actual armor, enclosed heavy machine guns/auto cannons, as well as a high level of mobility with an enclosed cockpit. It was very effective against the early generations of 01's combat machines
Just took a girl to see a movie Mat. She friendzoned me afterwards when I told her how I feel. So now I'm putting together a 1/35 Tamiya Type 90 Japanese main battle tank and enjoying your content. Thank you sir.
Don't accept friendzone, walk away entirely - you are nothing to her but that guy who pays to entertain her, don't waste time or effort on her, find someone who values you.
@@skrappyjon2019 A Bradley has decent armor. The thing is, armor doesn't make something indestructible (that includes even the newest tank designs and variants with addon armor).
@@skrappyjon2019 I've been inside, driven and maintained an M-113. It was so comforting to be "protected" by two layers of aluminum with an air gap between them. And so fun to hear about all of the opposition weapon systems that could tear right through it, or even better, start the aluminum armor burning. - There was even lore about the thing being able to float across water, if the water was not moving too fast, there were no waves, the vehicle had a well balanced load, there were no mechanical issues, all of the drain plugs were properly installed, the sump pumps worked, and the driver did everything perfectly. Yay.
@@MonkeyJedi99 I was a Bradley gunner before deployment and a commander after we got back. Was always reassuring to look down and see that fuel cell next to my leg. 😆
"Copy ground commander, we're on them. Firefly's one and two track the Thor. We'll handle the MadCat." - Making me take a trip down memory lane, Matsimus.
@@patrickkenyon2326 depending on the period that is consistent with the lore though. Back during the Clan invasion the MadCat - a.k.a. Timber Wolf could comfortably swing above its weight due to its superior technology. Back in those days it was far from uncommon that heavy Clan mechs wiped the floor with Inner Sphere assault mechs - especially at range.
@@ranekeisenkralle8265 Been a long time since I read those books. Clan ERPPCs, 2 LRM 15s? Seems like an Atlas should eat them at close range. I always hated the Clans. Clobbered the Kell Hounds. Killed Grayson Karlyle. Killed Natasha too.
@@ranekeisenkralle8265 Haha yeah so did I my friend I do the same thing when I see something on Rimworld and when I see 40k content I tend to read it in "Skeleton King". Anything WW1 or WW2 related tends to get read internally as Grandpa Tex. I've decided though it's neither a good nor bad thing it simply is what it is lol.
Im surprised titanfall footage was used but Titans themselves are not mentioned. They are probably the best interpretation of what a practical combat mech should be: a combat vehicle who's role is in the middle between and IFV and MBT doctrinally, and is designed to operate in urban environments to leverage its strengths to maximum effect while mitigating weaknesses.
The only way a walking mech can be relevant or useful when compared to wheel or track based vehicles is when you prioritize your build for agility. In other words, talk to me when your mech can scale mountains at speed, climb rock faces, fall down and get back up, change direction, sprint for long distances, ALL at speed. Then we can talk about it's viability. As of right now, even the most sophisticated walkers travel at a snails pace and can only travers half the terrain organic lifeforms can.
@@MrVkull yep. And its likely to remain the same for a while... Though synthetic muscles could change that. I mean, its one form of motive tech nothing else than a walker could take advantage of (wheels and muscle-like structures just arent compatible), and would be way more resilient to damage than hydraulics while at the same time being more powerful. In fact battletech treats that as one of the key technologies that made mechs possible (the other being the fusion reactor as a power source that can feed these muscles that always need some power imput even on idle, and the neurohelmet to help control the machine)
@@centurionmbt2487 Me neither. I'm more of a fan of the King Crab. Nothing says "F*** off!" quite like a pair of AC20s. But the Atlas is decidedly iconic nonetheless. If for no other reason than Kerensky's quote about the intended design specs for the mech. "A mech as powerful as possible, as impenetrable as possible, and as ugly and foreboding as concievable - so that fear itself will be our ally."
I've always seen mechs as either infantry support in a rubble filled terrain where other vehicles could easily get stuck or as massive artillery platforms with secondary direct fire capabilities. Tho the idea of just massive titanic machines making their way against enemy forces bringing down the wrath of the emperor has always been an awe inspiring thought
@@kazak8926 he just said it would eather be for assisting in heavily destructed area or for heavy weapons platforms. Worrying about weight? Put more area to put weight Like four legs. Other then that mechs are pointless.
@@terrelldurocher3330 But even light vehicles assisting infantry will still have the same issues. The weight of your car for example, but put into two points would probably cause the infantry support vehicle meant to help in ruined areas would fall through the rubble. Like what happened in WW2 with tanks falling into sewers and basements through ruined buildings. And adding a bunch of legs is also just as unlikely, why make a complex machine with alot of moving parts that can break and that can only walk at like 5mph when a wheeled or tracked artillery vehicle can do the same.
A lot of the armchair general detractors to mechs as weapons platforms seem to forget two things. The first is theater of combat, in which some make the idea of tanks and APCs particularly the ones of today's weight classes have several theaters of combat in which they are entirely ineffective. Some of those theaters mechs would be more effective. Next is the second detail they forget, turret height. Something that actually plays a role in determining the weapon types used, and role a ground combat vehicle plays. While popular artwork will always enjoy a more human design with the weapons placed lower, or in locked positions. The advantages of a mech over a more standardized armored fighting vehicle design are actually fairly unique and ignored by popular aesthetics. A Mech can be a mobile gun tower, historically and modernly we put machine-guns and AT on upper floors of fortified buildings, we stand atop walls to shoot down at the enemy etc now we have that particularity on a mobile platform but with much more height advantage and that advantage can be taken and used in uneven terrain. and not in the smoth brain "it walk up stairs" but in the actuality of "it can stand behind something and still shoot down at the enemy granting it natural hull down advantage via terrain". And the next unique advantage that is ignored but could also be achieved by mecha designs in then variable height in the field which plays off the first, but if you have a frame that can raise and lower itself while being able to fire, you actually would in the right terrain need significantly less armor as your vehicle is able to start seeking and tanking advantage of cover more readily like a infantryman would. A mecha isn't a tank, and should never be considered as a replacement of a tank , however where a tank and the IFV is the modern equivalent to mounted cavalry, a mech would be the equivalent of a heavily armored soldier, and when placed right they will be far more devastating to a foe than cavalry in the same placement.
I think that models such as the goliath (starcraft), black-jack, archer, and catapult make the most sense in so far as they focus on bringing firepower and mobility with as few silly weaknesses as possible(to borrow from ace combat the coffin system from the faulkner which is encase the pilot in metal and use cameras for visual) models that use arms have to deal with the possibility of said arms getting damaged and blown off (same with legs but we are going for the most practical models as opposed to being against the mech in general). Anyone who has played a mechwarrior game knows what i am talking about
The technology to imitate muscle groups exists. Finding a way to combine that with an exoskeleton and powering it for long durations would be an achievement. Mechs should be hover craft weapon ships. Warhammer 40k and the Guyver is my inspiration.
First I think we will have some sort of exo skeleton that amplifies mobility and strength mainly but it will be a bit bulky at first. Then we will probably have a light version but still looks quite large and chunky on the outside. Finally we will have something like a amp suit and advance warfare style light exo skeleton that can carry shit ton of equipments. Honestly though, Amp suit might even come out early because it’s just so believable
Small mechs could be used as infantry support in areas where wheels or tracks get bogged down and helicopters have a to short on target/ on the ready time. Stuff like city rubble, dense forests, mountains and similarily compromising terrain. A mech would be as much of a diva as a helicopter though most likely, so when ever possible a conventional vehicle would be more efficient. Power armor has way more use cases, being infantry plus.
@@WALTERBROADDUS yeah tracked armor is not as mobile and with the rise of atgms they are big, clunky and are a huge target, but mechs they could be small battery powered and would be very hard to hit with an atgm.
@@tristanr7799 Tracked vehicles can go more places, they have worse ground pressure and can’t go up as steep a slope. I see mechs more in the logistics role then any combat role.
Would include Front Mission 'Wanzers'. The mech is very Modular make it quite ease for maintenance and repairs. Can also customize part from different arm manufactures so you don't have to rely only on one source.
I know this is not the topic but I'm gonna put this in anyway: A mech has different use cases than a tank and fits a different role. It is supposed to be a fast, mobile and adaptive(in the non-titanic cases) weapons platform than can traverse terrain that a tank can't, deploy and move faster than a tank can and change it's loadout depending on the current need. Basically they need to fit the role of a 10ft tall armored infantryman otherwise a tank is always the more effective choice. The only exception is when they are used as an artillery piece if their legs can double as suspension since it would allow the mech to fire larger calibers with the huge recoil management that articulated legs would provide. If the mech legs can provide suspension for an artillery piece then it should also become possible to equip them with deployable rollers or skis and jet engines and turn them into high speed weapon platforms that can carry the armament of a tank at faster speeds while at the same time traverse difficult terrain in low speed mode. Also on the subject of articulated arms that carry weapons vs weapons being mounted directly on the chassis the argument is the same for tank turrets vs chassis mounted guns, though in the case of the mechs it makes changing weapons way easier as well as having the arm become spare parts for the leg if part interchangeability is taken to its logical extent. Same can not be said as easily about a tanks turret drive and wheel drive. Essentially, for mechs to exist, they need to be faster than the tanks that would also exist, more mobile than them and more adaptive than them. They wouldn't be made to fight tanks their own size as such tanks will always need less to carry a mech killer gun while also have better located armor than the mech they will face. Though again that doesn't mean they are useless since by the same logic a tank is useless because helicopters can exist for the same cost. The only case in which a mech should square against a tank should be when the tank is a landship that is way larger than the mech just like the way when infantry can be used against a tank. tl;dr: a mech is supposed to be what a tank can not be, not what a tank excels at. Thank you for coming to my Schizo-Talk. Yes, I know this is a Wendy's.
Yeah there are supposedly Air Breathing MPD thrusters in development so it could be possible to have a mech that can boost indefinitely given the proper powerplant (maybe Lattice Confinement Fusion?), Carbon NanoTube muscles could be made very cheaply, stronger, and smaller than conventional electric or hydraulic acutators. Potential armaments could include RArefaction waVE guNs and ATGMs and it could carry 12.7mm Machineguns as standard armaments.
@@alphatriton6621 Fusion at this point is only good for generating Ph.D's in plasma physics, and not much else. The tokamak in France has taken 20 years to get to this point and it will take 20 more to get first plasma, most likely. Lattice confinement fusion has the problem of deuterating metals, which is itself energy intensive and, it has to be said, not easily "self-started." You need a neutron beam source which itself requires a large amount of power to produce and steer to start the reactions. Fission on the other hand, can be significantly miniaturised. A reactor the size of a dustbin can output 100MW inside a submarine. And it works, unlike fusion. The problem remains, however, of power conversion. Nuclear reactors of fission or fusion often require very large turbomachinery. Even assuming you could get significant fusion with lattice confinement, or fission with molten salts, it would not be practical if you needed a gas turbine the size of a house to produce the electricity needed. It's easy to produce nuclear reactions. Hell, you could make a "fusion reactor" today by making a thermonuclear warhead (the US has tens of thousands of them) and then setting it off under water inside a cave. The heat from the explosion would heat the water to boiling. Channel that steam to a turbine and you now have a working fusion reactor that also "disposes of nuclear weapons". Of course your power conversion system just also happens to be the size of a small town. As ever the downside is power conversion.
I love the at's from armoured trooper Votoms. Like 12 feet tall. Able to move fast, cut sharp corners. Reasonably tough. The scopedog and brutishdog are just amazing.
Credits of Prawn Suit should go to Fear 2 light mech armour. Why Fear 2 mechs light & heavy aren't mentioned at all. DP9 Heavy Gear left out too. There's Pacific Rim but there's no Robot Jox
fun fact: the behind the scenes about the Amp Suit from Avatar talks about how they are not top of the line weapons compared to what the real earth military uses but instead are repurposed utility amplified strength exo suits with some sensors and weapons attached
@@JinKee those human sky people in avatar are miners + security firms equipped with obsolete weapons permitted for private use not on par with military level. For example in 50 years later, F-15, AH-64E became obsolete being made available for security firms to use in colonial planet.
Walking gun platform is gonna be the light tank of the future, ability to carry any weapons would make them most versatile weapon system out there, but they wont replace the tank, because they wont have armour nor the power to weight ratio until we can shrink power systems able to move 100 ton machines around like it was a human being.
Mechs from the anime Obsolete are the 2nd best and a more likely style to have. But having a small enough power source for something like that is the issue, since we don't have access to an alien mech to use as a frame. Massive mechs will always be my fetish. 18 meters or bigger.
The problem is that they are too maintenance heavy. Each joint and servo is a point of failure. Maybe they could be used to traverse difficult terrain that wheeled or tracked vehicles couldn't. Or something like small exo suit to increase the survivability of an individual.
In my opinion speed/mobility is the most important factor for a mech. It allows you to dictate the pace of the battle. You can engage or retreat at your own leisure. Modern armor(such as tanks) operate under the mindset. Don't be detected If detected, don't be acquired If acquired, don't be hit If hit, don't be killed I smaller profile has served tanks well, so too it would serve mechs as well. The bigger your mech, the bigger a target it creates and is slower. Something along the lines of a mobile suit/Gundam where mobility and maneuverability comes first, then firepower and armor.
A better analogy would most likely be VOTOMS and Exoframes, Mobile Suits are too massive at 18+ Meters and were armored to tank hits. -Newtype abilities are also the reason why they're so effective in the first place compared to more conventional weapons-
as I said under survey: "Animatrix mechs, they looked cool despite being shattered by much stronger and bigger machine warriors in the final years of 50 years long war between humans and machines (story The Second Renaissance part II )" But also mech from District 9 is my favorite as well.
Imagine a Stridsvagn 103 but with robotic spider legs, That is what a realistic mech would resemble in the modern age. Its only role would be to assault immobile fortified positions in/through extremely rugged natural/artificial terrain. It would have more armor for its weight than an MBT due to the smaller internal volume by using a fully fixed gun. Unlike continuous tracks a legged fixed gun vehicle and aim and move in any direction with redundant mobility.
Reason why mechs haven't been an option for the military is very simple: batteries. Batteries that we use today aren't enough, or do not have a high energy density to support all the systems a mech, militarized of course, can support. Diesel isn't an options because it's loud. Yes mechs in general standing over 20ft would be noticeable but with an engine to support a mech has to be pretty big. Along with fire hazards and the lack of studying mech designs and mechs in general. Militaries wouldn't see mechs as practical bc well they are slow and can be disable more easily bc of modern tech at least in early designs. It would also be expensive to maintain. The one advantage would probably be that in closed spaces, a mech, possibly piloted by one pilot while maintaining communications on unmechanized units, can respond much more quickly within that area, but because most armies fight from a distance, there isn't really a need have that.
I think the Dreadnoughts from 40k would be a good example of what we could see. Mobile rocket launcher, heavy tank cannons or mini guns but with a trade off for speed and armour.
@@zarektheinsane6656 Yeah basically mobile pillboxes. Maybe paint camo on them or hide them in the rubble where they can reasonably manoeuvre and change position and they'd do pretty well.
@@alphatriton6621 procurement of parts wouldn't be that much of an issue since you can reuse the same parts on every leg. Still a little harder to maintain than a bipedal one, but also can carry _much_ more armor and _much_ heavier weapons. Still doesn't beat a tank, but much less impractical than a humanoid one.
Next please do a video on the Toyota Land Cruiser 70 series as its role as technicals in Africa. One of the best untold stories of how a car in the Chadian army turned back the Libyan army who was armed with then state of the art Soviet equipment including brand new T-62 MBTs
Biggest issue with mechs is the power source I think. And I reckon it would have two main uses: First is as a support platform that could carry equipment and work as a mobile gun emplacement. Something small enough to work in close environments where a tank might have issues. Such a platform might look a little bit like a sentinel from 40k or avatar mech (more realistic versions of course). Second is as an exoskeleton, that would still need to be able to run alongside infantry. However, if it could I could see an exoskeleton being used to carry heavier guns that infantry would struggle with,l. Bust such a skeleton needs armour enough to stand up to most infantry rifles and handguns. That would make it struggle in swampy ground due to weight. I can see it working a bit like fallout 4 power armour. Both would thrive carrying support equipment, large shields to protect infantry a bit how ww1 tanks where used, communication equipment etc. That little ramble went a bit long!
As someone who played like 300 hours on Inferno as the Air Raider in Earth Defense Force 4.1 & 5, I see the words Matsimus and Mechs in the same sentence: I GAU-8 my left mouse button
I would say that small mech style like in votom and obsolete anime would be the most practical because it would be small enough to run around in an urban environment with ease and it would not be easily spotted and blast to oblivion on open ground. These small much would be light and small enough to fight on a mountain and jungle as fire support platform but the most important fact is, it's very cheap.
true, but the only reason why Exoframes are so cheap is that aliens are supplying them in exchange for limestone, trying to procure something like an exoframe would be a pain unless CNT muscles manage to leave the lab.
@@alphatriton6621 it will still be much cheaper and more effective in battle than some larger Mech because they can be field in large numbers and carry sufficient firepower with great mobility on tough terrain.
Think the real issue that is stopping mechs from becoming real is how do you protect the legs? A possible solution is to give them some form of close in weapon system to shoot down incoming missiles. The closest I have seen to this is the Zaku 2 from Gundam which had shrapnel bombs to take out infantry that got to close.
@@ehsanalikhanloo3249 Tanks have had the same problem. do you want speed or amour. But if a mech gets damaged it will take more time and money to repair it then a tank. So you need a system in place to prevent as much damage as possible to the vital areas.
The US Military already has lasers on ships that are capable of taking out missiles and drones, if there was a way to scale it down into something that looks similar to a Reaper's camera then there would be no need to utilize physical APS. Of course this all relies on having a powerful and compact powerplant to drive the whole thing, maybe Lattice Confinement Fusion could be the solution.
When tanks first appeared in world war one they weren't very reliable, but scared the enemy to death. Seeing a mech the size of a skyscraper would be, I imagine, just a little bit more intimidating.
I can magine a walking tank in mountainous terrain. Like there are walking harvesters. But apart from that I guess that any large vehicle does better with tires or tracks.
To Matsimus: you can also refer to Iron Harvest 1922. Their battle mechs are designed in the Steampunk-style. Its arsenal is not as aggressive as the other sci-fi works, but is quite practical - in my opinion - and justified in the modern warfare's common sense.
The First GDI Mech is called the "Wolverine" and I could definitely see it as being useful in Urban combat zones, as it could potentially enter a building while carrying heavier anti-tank weapons and enough armor to require an autocannon to defeat, though some could consider it to be Generation 0 Power Armor given it's size.
For urban environments I would go with the Urbanmech-R70 variant. Sure, it is slow, but it is jump-capable and lugs around the Battletech-equivalent of the GAU-8 Avenger (the main armament of the A-10 Warthog).
I always hate when people think of mechs as bipedal tanks, when they're not. They're a way to apply infantry tactics on a vehicle/tank level. They're way more fragile than a tank due to less armor and exposed joints, but their agility lets them utilize cover and concealment, such as buildings, hills and destroyed enemy tanks, making it unnecessary, whereas a tank would have half of its main body and its tracks exposed long before it could rear a corner and fire a shot from cover, not to mention exposing the fragile bottom of the tank when driving over hills to avoid direct fire. "Their high profile makes them useless" they say, as if soldiers would just stand around in the open, instead of seeking cover or going down and crawling to reduce their profile. You'd see a track coming around a wall, you'd have plenty of time to hide or fire back. If you suddenly saw a barrel and almost nothing else, you'd have no time to react before it started firing whatever firepower it had. Plus, a tank is a tank. A giant hunk of armor without additional uses other than carrying firepower. A mech can be used for combat as aforementioned, but it could also instantly just put away its gun and carry additional equipment, essentially turning into a crane/truck. Or it can lift infantry and personel to higher ground like an elevator/ladder, or grab nearby terrain and miscelaneous items to throw them, turning into pseudo artillery. Or they could even help the aforementioned tanks drive onto the trucks needed to transport them, before just climbing on top of it themselves. Tanks are better at being tanks. Infantry is better at being infantry. And mechs would be useful enough as both.
Another think regarding the mobility is that in Urban enviroment any mech can simply lift one leg and then avoid the tank , if you have a tank and there is a broken tank blocking the street there is nothing that you can do , since a broken tank is a Road blocker , but that isn't an issue if you have a mech , same thing applies to Czech hedgehogs , these easily block tanks but not mechs , so that mobility of there being nothing that can truly stop them without the use of weapons will come at handy
Tanks and helicopters have a pretty high profile if you compare them to infantry. But, I don't see anyone crusading against them even though they cost a ton to produce and maintain, and they can be taken out by cheaper ATGMs /MANPADs. The same goes for IFVs. On paper, they are nothing but shittier tanks that cost a lot more than APCs, but Ukraine just asked for 700 hundred of those damn things. Things aren't useless just because they can be destroyed.
"They're way more fragile than a tank due to less armor and exposed joints, but their agility lets them utilize cover and concealment, such as buildings, hills and destroyed enemy tanks, making it unnecessary," Thinking like that is what led to the battle cruiser "it's fast enough to outrun anything that can outgun it, and powerful enough to outgun anything that can keep pace with it." The problem with that is, if the battle cruiser actually does find itself in a fight with something that can threaten it, then it's too lightly armored to survive. Look at the Battle of Jutland. Look at the battle between the Bismarck and the Hood. The "speed is armor" philosophy is dead and buried beneath the depths of the North Sea. "Their high profile makes them useless" they say, as if soldiers would just stand around in the open, instead of seeking cover or going down and crawling to reduce their profile." What cover? You don't seem to understand how difficult it would be for a mech to find suitable cover under most combat scenarios. You also don't seem to understand how long it would take a mech lay down on the ground. Humans are able to do it quickly because we are small, light weight, and have little delay between our thoughts and actions. A mech in contrast would be large, weigh several tons, and would be controlled by a pilot, meaning there is a delay between them conceiving an action and then inputting it into the mech's control surfaces. "You'd see a track coming around a wall, you'd have plenty of time to hide or fire back. If you suddenly saw a barrel and almost nothing else, you'd have no time to react before it started firing whatever firepower it had." Actually, you would hear both the mech and the tank long before you saw them, and you'd likely feel the vibrations in the ground form the mech's footsteps. Also, no tank would ever drive around a corner that hadn't been checked by infantry, who would immediately engage and suppress the enemy to discourage them from shooting back. "Plus, a tank is a tank. A giant hunk of armor without additional uses other than carrying firepower." Yes, that's what dedicated logistics vehicles are for. "A mech can be used for combat as aforementioned, but it could also instantly just put away its gun and carry additional equipment, essentially turning into a crane/truck." And since it's weapon is an external attachment rather than integrated into it's design, it cannot be outfitted with internal ammo storage and feeding systems, greatly reducing the amount of ammo it can carry into battle, while increasing the time it takes to reload. "Or it can lift infantry and personel to higher ground like an elevator/ladder," Such a process would be slow and tedious, leaving all involved vulnerable. "or grab nearby terrain and miscelaneous items to throw them, turning into pseudo artillery." This would require them to holster their weapon, pick up the debris, take time to aim the debris, then wind up to throw the debris. Plenty of time for the enemy to take cover or shoot back with anti armor weapons. If you're talking about throwing at something the pilot cannot see, then there is no guarantee that the debris will not break up during its flight, causing collateral damage and potentially endangering the friendly units you are trying to support. "Or they could even help the aforementioned tanks drive onto the trucks needed to transport them, before just climbing on top of it themselves." Such an action greatly risks damaging the tank. Also, why would a tank need help driving onto a specially designed transport vehicle? "Tanks are better at being tanks. Infantry is better at being infantry. And mechs would be useful enough as both." No, it's the worst of both worlds. Infantry that's too big to take cover, and a tank that is too lightly armored and armed to do any heavy fighting.
@@ulforcemegamon3094 Actually, they can be stopped quite easily by the same stuff that stops tanks. You just have to make it bigger to account for the increase in size. A deeper, denser field of Czech hedgehogs so the mech can't step over or around them. A wider, deeper anti-tank trench so the mech can't step over it. Drag more broken vehicles onto the road you expect the tank to walk down.
@@schibleh531 No one is saying mechs are useless because they can be destroyed. We're saying they're useless because everything they could do can already be done by something that would be way less maintenance intensive. The few advantages they could theoretically offer are too niche to justify the massive investment they would be.
The bigger they are, the harder they fall. No matter what the technology is regarding mech suit warfare there will always be a weapon to take them down. In addition, way too many moving parts that can go wrong. What is realistic are armored exoskeletons. It's all about stealth, speed, and maneuverability in a small technology advanced package.
Pretty much my thought. Tracked vehicles require a huge amount of maintenance to keep running, the added complexity of a bipedal 'walker' would require far, far more. Another issue that comes to mind is also ground pressure, a tracked vehicle spreads its mass over a relatively large area, even wheeled vehicles have at least 4 main points of contact. Bipedal vehicles have only 2 points of contact, thus increasing the ground pressure, which would actually *reduce* mobility in rough or soft terrain in comparison to a tracked vehicle of similar weight.
@@alganhar1 Tracked vehicles require less maintenance than a 6x6 or 8x8 wheeled vehicle. They have less strategic mobility, but greater tactical mobility compared to wheeled vehicles. The primary disadvantage of tracked vehicles for strategic mobility is that their tracks destroy asphalt, and also the tracks themselves overheat and break down on long road marches. Fully rubber or partially rubberised tracks, road wheels and return rollers significantly reduce rolling resistance though, and modern tanks can go a lot further. Still not as far as a 6x6 or 8x8 but if you're routinely doing 500km+ road marches, you've either already won and are advancing unopposed; or you've lost so badly that you have to retreat to the other side of the country. I don't see super long road marches as anything other than dick measuring for its own sake. I don't think that a 6x6 wheeled vehicle with independant tyre inflation systems, mine-resistant suspension arms, and 3 times the locking differentials that a conventional car has, is going to be somehow that much less maintenance than a tank, which just has the drive sprocket and track segments to take care of. Most tanks use torsion bars which are almost maintenance free, and rubberised road wheels are non-pneumatic, so only require inspection. No pressure checks. Tracks _will_ break before differentials and suspension arms, but track segment repair is a half hour job on the roadside. A borked suspension arm or differential means withdrawal to the motorpool. Obviously the armoured exoskeleton, or the walker unit would require much more maintenance than either. This was the main reason why the forestry walking machine, the Timberjack, failed to find commercial success: th-cam.com/video/CD2V8GFqk_Y/w-d-xo.html .
** So, to summarize, here are the characteristics a mech should have: 1) They should have better terrain mobility than tanks 2) They should be relatively tall, articulating weapons platforms (to help them attack, defend themselves, and seek targets in novel ways) 3) They should operate in a way, where they supplement, and support tanks. Not replace them. *(This could happen, since the suspension of mechs are built differently than that of tanks. Meaning that the benefits they get from their special suspension/locomotion must be "balanced" by the compromises they need to take, in order to get said benefits)* This should be done by exploiting favorable terrain to out-flank, or avoid fortifications, and enemy concentrations. Also, by out-flanking they should work to compromise defensive positions to help the tanks break thru. Also, they should be employed in a way to use their favored terrain, to defend, and make it difficult as heck for the enemy's advance (thru said terrain, or near it). *(Side note. You may have noticed that tanks can be improved in all sorts of ways to remain competitive with any potential mech. However, all the tank-based technologies we've talked about, all have traits of mechs, in one way, or the other. So, this only further proves that mechs are militarily useful. And also, even in the worse case scenario, if mechs were somehow still not considered necessary, the technologies that exhibit their traits are more than useful enough in improving tracked/wheeled vehicles. So, technically the mech wins out in the end. In one way, or the other)* *(So, in my opinion. I think something like DARPA's Ground-X vehicle, some heavy armour, a turret, a 40-90mm caliber gun/autocannon, and maybe some missiles would seem nice. Also if it can also side strafe like a boss like the Panhard CRAB, then that would be SUPER AWESOME 🤟🤟🤟)* *(If a 4 legged mech looks like DARPA's GXV, then I guess, a 6, or 8 legged mech would look something like the "Future Protected Vehicle" concept)* www.thinkdefence.co.uk/2012/11/the-tank-is-dead-long-live-the-tank-part-5-future-protected-vehicles/
I suspect they'd be like the Titans from Titanfall or War Robots, nothing big and flashy just two legs, maybe two arms and a mix of autocannons and ATMs. They'd certainly be useful in urban or airborne operations where you need a flexible, lightweight vehicle. Whether or not they'd have AI, idk.
If built as a modular platform, I could see a variety of roles a manned/unmanned mech would be a game changer in... They don't even need to be as large/heavy as MBT's... Sorry, was really into AC as a teenager/young adult.. always thought it was the best way to implement mech technology...
I actually think titans have it right on 3 counts (please consider each mech in it's own universe). 1. Ground pressure, most mechs will get bugged down in mud or fall through bridges. Titans are big enough to hit bedrock - or have anti-gravitic engines. 2. Power supply. These aren't going to run on petrol. The 40k universe has power sources with sufficient density to actualy make them mobile. 3. Control interface. A couple of joysticks isn't going to be enough for complex movement: a mind interface unit linking you to a psychotic AI... now you're talking.
Good points. And then there is the sheer amount of god-emperor-darn armor and void shields on those things. Good luck at stopping one of those things if it for some reason happens to be mad at you... "You and which army?" *gestures at the glassed landscape outside*
I'd imagine the Avatar mech really being the only viable mech, and only if it's not used in a combat role. I'd imagine it would be great for combat engineers where the mech could replace a lot of the vehicles used for heavy lifting.
titanfall mechs are more viable as military mechs, they are big but not too big, and most of all they were originally used as agriculture equipment and for space exploration due to their sturdy chassis and they are literally programmed to protect the pilot, they are also efficient since if you didn't notice their batteries are actually the armor charge batteries from apex meaning they are easy to maintain since parts for a titan is compatible with a lot of human-sized equipment not to mention it has a far longer operation time, they can be used for utilities and when a combat situation arises you don't even need to give it a gun since it is already combat capable with its built-in weaponry and its sheer force and durability alone
With advancements in technology, I am 100% sure that mechs will become a common sight in wars of the future. Our modern day tech makes it impractical, but improved motor tech, improved armor tech, etc will all make mechs practical and useful in the future. I honestly believe that tanks will be rendered obsolete by mechs in the future. Hell, tanks are almost obsolete now. I've seen people say a mech could never be practical or is not suitable for war, but that is just folly. In 1855, many said that a rifle holding more than one shot would never be useful to your average infantryman. In 1913, people thought that airplanes had no viable use in warfare. During WW2, some in Hitler's cabinet thought the idea of a guided long range missile was a novelty. In the late 40s, many laughed at the idea of a helicopter having a real use in conflict. New ideas are always treated like a toy...until they work. I am confident that 100, maybe even just 50 or so years from now, a legged combat mech design, more agile and more capable than a tank with equal or better armor and weapons will walk the battlefield and be the new standard for armored warfare.
9:24 I always thought Metal Gear REX is what you'd get if you tried to make a bipedal mech with the aesthetics of an Abrams Tank. It was incredibly fun to pilot it in MGS4 and no knee joint weakspots!
I think the Avatar AMP, 40k Sentinel, or the Adeptus Mechanicus four-legged Dunecrawler would be most practical IRL mostly due to increased rough-terrain mobility, anything bigger is just too big and clumsy.
I miss Heavy Gear 2. It was a Win98 title based on a tabletop game from Dreampod 9. The Gears were only about 3-4 meters tall. Played the hell out of Armored Core on Playstation as well.
12:12-12:18 Yeah. But it was a real shame that the controller didn't worked out. People had a pointlessly difficult time of operating the motion-controlled controller. But, when it worked......goddamn, it feels sooooooooooooooooooo good
I’ve always thought mechs work well in a short range roll like a heavily armed mech from a helicopter or something to provide fire support for ground troops in a roll that you can’t with a tank in urban environments.
It'd probably be more reasonable for them to be a long ranged fire support. Like the Walkers from Metal Gear solid 5. Fast moving, small, easily ditchable, highly customizable, support units.
At that point why wouldn't Just get a Attack Helicopter, Outfit it with more Armor, More Weapons and Powerful Guns, Instead of just hauling some large weight around? And Tanks absolutetly can give Fire Support in Urban Environments, they form a Crucial Part of Urban Warfare Doctrine for the military, Just like At the US in Iraq and The Soviets in Afghanistan.
Just imagine a war between India and China in Himalayas Mountain a Mecha can walk between the valleys and give massive casualties to the infantry it may vulnerable to anti tank rocket but there are Hard-kill countermeasure systems like Trophy also automated gun turrets can response fire toward the direction of incoming fire via the subsonic waves like Boomerang system it reach to the tall rock then uses it rocket boosters to jump up and land on the higher ground then it uses its heat seeking loitering air burst mini-rockets to Target remaining infantry who may hiding for a possible ambush then uses its engineering device to make climbing facilities for the friendly infantry
The most practical place for mechs would be in the rear with the gear. The big legs and hands could be used to lift things. You could never armor it enough to be survivable. But its ability to lift things and flip over stick vehicles or knock over walls and doors would be key.
Just a question Matsimus, have you heard of the team from Vancouver who made a functional mech? The mech is apparently intended for racing. It's a big four-legged vehicle that's really cool. Furrion Exo-Bionics: th-cam.com/users/FurrionExoBionicsvideos Just wanted to hear from an artilleryman on how their mech design could possibly be used as a weapons platform.
if I had to choes what mech I would use in sci fi warfare I would definantly pick the highlander assault mech from BattleTech, that mech is a beast and piloted by a beast.
Lol. That is one hell of a Jehovah's witness at ur door m8 "Hullo good sir. Do you have some time to talk about our lord, and savior? *TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTHE EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEMPEROR?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?* " 🤣🤣🤣
@@forickgrimaldus8301 and that includes orbital insertion, yes. Just think about how massive a drop-pod has to be that is supposed to land an Imperator-class Titan. Heck, the sheer impact force would have to result in a bit of an earthquake - even if slowed down significantly.
Mechs would realistically only be effective as guard and defensive duty.. forces attackers to focus their fire and attention. IRL what ground troops have learned to do is just put down a lot of small arms fire to force targets to remain relatively stationary while they laze the target and call in missiles and artillery.
![[MV] A leap of faith...ความเชื่อใจครั้งสุดท้าย (From "Petrichor the series")](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/U1piZH2CNXA/mqdefault.jpg)
Download War Robots for free on your mobile device wrrbts.com/matsimus New players will get an armed robot with a unique skin, 100 gold and 50,000 silver.
First 1000 players will also get an extra-bonus: HARD FLAMETHROWER “Ember”. Hurry up!
For me
If there is no monster or what so ever
Pacific rim or strongest transformers of soviet empire
Will be verry alarming on us unless
They can build strongest robot from the allies of it
In my opinion speed/mobility is the most important factor for a mech. It allows you to dictate the pace of the battle. You can engage or retreat at your own leisure.
Modern armor(such as tanks) operate under the mindset.
Don't be detected
If detected, don't be acquired
If acquired, don't be hit
If hit, don't be killed
I smaller profile has served tanks well, so too it would serve mechs as well. The bigger your mech, the bigger a target it creates and is slower.
Something along the lines of a mobile suit/Gundam where mobility and maneuverability comes first, then firepower and armor.
Did you ever play the first Steel Battalion?
Wait, how did you get Steel Battalion Heavy Armor to even work? Everyone I heard of who tried it couldn't get the Xbox Kinect to even remotely function properly basically rendering the game unplayable.
What, no Iron Harvest? Or Gundams?
Honestly, if they could develop an exoskeleton for the soldier that would allow him to carry all of his kit and enable the soldier to run a 3-minute mile for a few hours, that would be a great Mech in my eyes.
And once the equipment are to handle with muscle power it doesn't matter how physically strong the pilot are. The absolutely weakest soldiers vould be lugging around the heaviest equipment. Besides they probably be small sized as well to fit better into a cramped cockpit. That is unless it is remote controlled or a robot.
Starship Troopers. The Marauder suit. Although they are used more against unarmored opponents.
The US is working on something like that.
Nanosuit in a nutshell
That's power armor, not mechs.
Personally, I think the failure is that most scifi seem to want to use mechs as a replacement for Tanks
I personally would think that Mechs would be a replacement/enhancement of Infantry.
They'd be like a return of Heavy Infantry
Something like MECs from xcom EW fit that concept really closely
Just like in Battletech
@@doktor_spritz9344 Battletech mechs are not at all like what they said.
Yeah , the biggest mistake is that , besides , tanks aren't the only armored unit that exist in the battlefield
@@accountname9506 I think he's referring to the fact that in battletech dispite mechs being the main fighting force in alot of conflicts tanks and infantry are still used and skilled commanders have been able to destroy entire units of mechs with infantry and tanks.
Small mechs would make sense. I only really see them as a support role. They could also be walking gun platforms
Neither would benefit from loosing their tracks
Experiments with small walking robots to transport equipment have been going on for several years now. Going from that I can definitly see a walking weapon platform being used down the road, especially as an non line of sight fireing missile launcher.
I'm thinking something like the Walker Gears from MGS:5...
@@1943germany Or the M1A4 Juggernaut and XM-2 Reginleif from the “86” series. Those could be air droppable infantry support vehicles IMO
You might want to check out an anime called Obsolete. They're not the big stompy or super agile, but some where in between. It shows them how I would imagine a suit of powered armor to be armed and armored.
The title is missleading. I though this video was about technical stuff about the subject, no about "my top ten favourite mechas".
Dunno if it's been mentioned, but Metal Gear Rex is described in game as intended to be a "nuclear mobile artillery platform." It wasn't designed to be a battlemech to go fight other mechs, but to be capable of multiple nuclear strikes via the rail gun, while being entirely self sufficient and hard to find by operating in extremely remote areas.
That's actually what makes the Metal Gears work with me. They have extremely fine-tuned mobility and armor just for that purpose of acting as a nuclear submarine, but on land.
same. i do appreciate that they aren't entirely sitting ducks too, they have a decent line of defense (though mostly to ground targets)@@VultureXV
@@Y2KGMR I'd say alot of metal gears have anti air capabilities, it's just not their speciality. They'd most likely be supported by anti air turrets. Or they'd end up getting a anti air gun or two attached to handle it themselves.
Rex was more nuclear artillery platform with "minimum" self defense weapon. Still tough enough for mech battle tho
Metal Gear Ray, on the otherhand, can be considered as a battlemech.
It was designed to fight other Metal Gears, or at least to countermeasure against Metal Gear Rex.
Video title: "What kind of Battle Mech's make sense for modern warfare"
Me: "Oh cool, Matsimus will delve into the realities of warfare to theorize what a real battle suit might end up looking like"
Video is actually just a top 10 list where Matsimus tells us what he likes about all of the best known sci fi walkers.
Me: "Cool, I learned nothing."
@Zorro Laplaya When talking about multi story high walking tanks like in Mech Warrior, I would agree.
But I still see potential for human sized armored exoskeletons.
A mech suit loses it's usefulness the moment the human pilot is unable to walk around in it as if they were strolling down the street.
The point is to make something as tough as an armored vehicle but as agile as a single soldier. If that can't be done, there is no point to a mech suit.
@@chappy0061 Also i can imagine that a tank with eight well armored relaitve short leg with the ability to drop the damaged leg is less vulnerable to lose mobility than tracks ...on the other hand mud exists......
@@theMPrints
1. You missed the point of my comment entirely.
2. Not everything with armor plating is designed to compete with a tank.
3. Soldiers walk in mud just fine.
@Zorro Laplaya The closest you can get is 'mini-mecha' or power armor, and honestly, I think those roles are looking increasingly like they will be fulfilled by drones of various designs. Some of those drones may even be much bigger than a human (though certainly smaller than most vehicles) and have legs, but the giant robot concept will have come full circle to its early origins with the 'operator' giving instructions from the outside.
@@theMPrints The question is . . . What are the engineering tradeoffs. For instance, while can imagine a bank of short stumpy legs with only a few degrees of freedom each being able to propel a metal box, I doubt any such set of legs is going to be able to keep up with tracks in terms of mobility. MBTs are in fact capable of surprising clips of speed over rough terrain for something weighing over fifty tons.
You might say these legs would give it better traverse over very rough terrain but like . . . The problem tanks have with rough terrain is frequently the same one a mecha would have. Namely driving across a hazard that tips them or otherwise causes the vehicles own weight to damage itself. If anything the tank is less vulnerable to unstable footing and most of the places a mech can traverse but a tank can't would realistic see the mech gambling with every step.
A wise Dreadnought had once said,
"I will endure a thousand deaths before i yield."
Wtf that dog 😆
@@rvh1999 The Source? Sounds like WH40K
(believe Russian Badger used this phrase in his Flamer Heresy video)
@@polarisraven5613 no, your profile pic, lol 👍😆
@@rvh1999 This dog is one of the cutaway scene from family guy.
Even in death I still serve.
Honestly I'd say mechs would be best used as artillery platforms, at least in theory it seems the most practical application.
I think that would be the best use for them as they first start rolling out as they will be very expensive to service and procure since it will all be new technology. A major point when drawing up the mech doctrine is that everyone will know where to shoot, the legs/joints as they are under constant pressure so a couple of high caliber shots in the correct area can bring the whole $15 Mil (for ex procurement number) mech crashing down.
I however think that militarized mechs are feasible in today's world as there are mechs that can move independently( the one in S Korea) that can be adapted into a supportive or combative role. The major question is what armaments will it have and how will the weight be distributed if x weapon system is implemented.
Because if they are used like artillery platforms like ACE1918 said, then I think a 4 or 6 legged configuration will have to be chosen with anchor mechanisms in the hind legs to help mitigate the recoil. Another question is will it be auto loaded like the Archer artillery system or will it be manually loaded.
I think it will be similar to the Archer where there is an autoloader that is preloaded before a combat mission so that the mech can shoot and scoot with minimal crew. Another benefit to this is that the artillery piece can shoot a much bigger rd as the preloading is most likely going to be done with the help of heavy machinery.
Nah our wheeled/tracked SPAAs can move faster and can carry heavier guns since its center of mass is low. I'd say mechs would be urban infantry support since they can carry heavier weapons and move faster than regular infantry. If a mech was in an open field, it would absolutely get slaughtered.
ground pressure would be too high. Combat tanks have ground pressure lower than infantry.
www.mathscinotes.com/2016/06/tank-track-ground-pressure-examples/
I see mechs used for moving heavy loads, or on Navy carriers to load aircraft with lower personnel requirements.
Wheeled and tracked vehicles are faster than walkers. Wheeled vehicles are in vogue right now because of the mobility advantages it has in countries with extensive road networks.
Honestly something like the Catapult would be best, a walking missile platform that wanders into positions, crouches down, then launches missiles like the javelin.
i think mechs would excel in occupation roles, eg walking around some city (Probably in the middle east, lets be honest) looking mean and offering a high vantage point from which to see,
The main weakness of our modern tanks and probably the area where bipedal mechs would shine is planetary exploration.
In an uninhabited planet, roads do not exist.
Tanks or pretty much any of our vehicles cannot function properly on super uneven terrain.
They can flatten it, but if there were hostiles constantly breathing down their neck, it would be next to impossible to do any construction.
Aside from that, bipedal mechs are useless and this hurts for a mech fan like me to say T.T
Again wheeled vehicles do it better, look at Mars rovers.
Tanks are not designed for roads, mate.
Umm doesn't world war 1 trenches doesn't have roads?
that's mars. imagine if it is an asteroid or some sort. @@yegenek
I'm so shocked they still haven't made a BattleTech movie. I feel like the audience is definitely there and you have a franchise that dates back to the 80s but is still going strong. War Robots and other current gen media would definitely draw other fans
hi, i am audience lol
on a serious note, hired steel exemplifies the possibility of battletech film
I can see it being popular for a modern audience especially with a trans mech and flag.
@MoonDevoured There are no film makers willing to go and delve into the truth of the Battletech Universe. I mean really. They could make an entire show just based on the political backstabbing alone.
A big BIG real world reason there hasn't been a Battletech movie or series, is the nightmarish morass of legal issues. The Battletech franchise is not owned by just one company, different parts of it are owned by several different companies all at once and trying to get the rights to a movie or series would be a massive pain. That said, there WAS a Battletech Saturday morning cartoon series from the 90's, which was posted to TH-cam in HD by Renegade HPG
Imagine Mad Max cinema meets Battle Tech style….
Mechs are great only if they have
- Mobility
- Armor against infantry weapons and countermeasures
- Bigger than a human but smaller than a main battle tank
- Firepower that can engage different types of threats
- And melee combat
So Starship Troopers mobile suits, then.
@@kmech3rd they're exoskeletons. I think this guy is talking about mechs like the mechs from Titanfall
glorious melee
@@kmech3rd yes
And arduino board
The Metal Gear really isn't meant to engage in normal combat, the massive railgun is meant to launch nuclear payloads at other countries without being detected. The other weapons it carries are just for self-defense.
@Bob Dole I meant, not sit there and fire at range like tanks, they fill fundamentally different roles, metal gears are meant to launch nukes at countries.
@Bob Dole main reason for the legs was it was supposed to be a solo launch platform. Able to fire and move before retaliation can be done to it.
@Bob Dole It uses electromagnetic rails to launch a nuke so that nations cannot detect it. They gave it legs so that it could be very maneuverable and get to places extremely quickly.
@Bob Dole What do you mean, of course, it has guns, a laser, and multiple other weapons to engage ground targets, but that is a secondary role, and those weapons are only meant to defend themselves if caught during solo missions. Go and read the description first before arguing. And the Metal Gear Ray was designed to destroy Metal Gears.
I couldn't be more annoying even if I was given a fork, a ceramic plate, & 2 pairs of speakers at 3 a.m. monday.
Good job Bob!! You won the internet...
“One clanner down, about a hundred more to go. Welcome to Port Arthur, sir.”
You mean "clanker"?
@@sovietred7371 Clanners from Battletech
@@sovietred7371 it’s from the Mechcommander intro movie
stravag!
@Arc_, well with Gunzburg one clanner was all it took, so there's that...
The Goliath from StarCraft looks the most practical to me. It's pretty much designed not to be like a tank and really fits in perfectly in the support role. Two 30mm autocannons and SAMS is good enough to deal most light threats and it's pretty mobile to boot. I wish there were variations of it like a dedicated flak variant or an AT variant with long range cannons. That would be cool.
Yeah Goliaths are pretty much the limit to size and armament a mech can have before it stops being useful and just becomes an intimidation stunt like the ridiculously oversized Ratt.
All a mech needs is to be a mobile elevated weapons platform and little more. As long as it can fill that role, it can leave all the heavy lifting to the tanks while it covers blind spots.
@Ž Š Four legged designs tend more awkward to work with but the Dragoon is certainly more low profile. You could probably outfit it with a mortar and it would be fine.
I can't stop thinking about CarBot's animations of Goliaths, where they appear to be constantly losing balance and just shooting all over the place once their guns actually fire.
yet somehow they blow combatants up.
All Terran vehicles in the original Starcraft feel lile civilian ones that got weaponized, which adds to the gritty immersion.
@@VultureXV They act that way in carbots because in Starcraft 1 they had the same pathing issues dragoons had so they wandered a lot.
i think the only realistic mech suit would be roughly 14 feet tall, and our arms and legs would have to go into the mechs arms and legs, almost like an oversized iron man suit, i think anything bigger then that would be useless, or would have to have a force field
The lack of Titanfall mechs makes me a bit sad, but to each their own. Also, 40k’s Imperial Knights might be up your alley, if ya see this.
Right, it not like he pictured em enough.
I really like how Respawn back in the day explained how Titans came to be. Their explanation of Titans being the current point in a gradual evolution of powered exoskeletons rather than the result of a project specifically to create mechs feels more natural, somehow.
@@sumotacular3681 taking into account we barely have the technology to make mechs and we already created two very basic prototypes i think it makes perfect sence that someone would try to create their own mechs once the technology is there
@@sumotacular3681 Battletech explanation is the best. It was result of scam, powered by megalomaniac what just happen to work. Largely due to combination of few rational technologies (primarily powerful artificial muscle, what make Mech mostly an armatur and can't be effectively used for rotation, so tanks). And tanks actually still can kick ass, but due to logistic bottleneck with FTL, it is commonly easier to move few giants, then tank battalion.
@@carso1500 I'm fairly sure first Spider Tanks are already in development. It is only matter of time when tech from NASA's ATHLETE, would be utilized in UGV's such as MULE.
Warning:
An unidentified mecha has entered the area.
Serial: RX-78-2
Codename: Gundam
A real life one would likely be smaller than a Tank but with the Power of Japan anything is possible.
They made a life size gundam. They just finished one that can move its legs and arms
I'd be more scared if a red zaku going three times normal speed appeared, or the zeta appeared.
I am Gundam
a AC from armored core or a next would be a good match to a gundam
"A titan would be pointless in combat cause it would not be able to handle the weight its pulling around..." This mans faith in the tools of God-Emperor is heretical!
Worry not, loyal subject of Him on Terra. The Emperor's Most Holy Inquisition has already been notified and will deal with this in short order. =I=
Yes he lacks faith in the God Emperor
The heritic understands not the wonders of the Omnissiah, the blessing of his protection via the void sheild, the holy hum of gravity feild generators the burning heart of the machine spirts plasma reactor. The god engines of the emperor of mankind bring woe to worlds, all quake in its steps, other tanks an mechs are mere specks, let its hellstorm cannons sing in jubilant praise as it brings the end of the heritics days.
Funnily enough this is how Ork Gargants work. You kill enough orks and their Gargants start being crushed by their own weight because there is not enough reality warping juice around to compensate for that.
God emperor? He is man emperor
You should look at the 1st generation APU from The Animatrix. It has actual armor, enclosed heavy machine guns/auto cannons, as well as a high level of mobility with an enclosed cockpit. It was very effective against the early generations of 01's combat machines
Just took a girl to see a movie Mat. She friendzoned me afterwards when I told her how I feel. So now I'm putting together a 1/35 Tamiya Type 90 Japanese main battle tank and enjoying your content. Thank you sir.
stay strong man. women dont own us.
Cease contact with her.
They're temporary. *DEMOCRACY IS FOREVER*
Don't accept friendzone, walk away entirely - you are nothing to her but that guy who pays to entertain her, don't waste time or effort on her, find someone who values you.
F
"Armor Personal Carrier"
COMPLETELY UNARMORED IN EVERY POSSIBLE WAY
Plot armour is best armour!!!!!! :D
Clearly never been inside a Bradley...
@@skrappyjon2019 A Bradley has decent armor. The thing is, armor doesn't make something indestructible (that includes even the newest tank designs and variants with addon armor).
@@skrappyjon2019 I've been inside, driven and maintained an M-113. It was so comforting to be "protected" by two layers of aluminum with an air gap between them. And so fun to hear about all of the opposition weapon systems that could tear right through it, or even better, start the aluminum armor burning.
-
There was even lore about the thing being able to float across water, if the water was not moving too fast, there were no waves, the vehicle had a well balanced load, there were no mechanical issues, all of the drain plugs were properly installed, the sump pumps worked, and the driver did everything perfectly. Yay.
@@MonkeyJedi99 I was a Bradley gunner before deployment and a commander after we got back. Was always reassuring to look down and see that fuel cell next to my leg. 😆
"Copy ground commander, we're on them. Firefly's one and two track the Thor. We'll handle the MadCat." - Making me take a trip down memory lane, Matsimus.
They didn't handle the Madcat.
@@patrickkenyon2326
What do you mean?
@@TeraQuad The Madcat took Big Al with him. Not a fair trade.
Lose a 100 ton to take out a 70 ton?
@@patrickkenyon2326 depending on the period that is consistent with the lore though. Back during the Clan invasion the MadCat - a.k.a. Timber Wolf could comfortably swing above its weight due to its superior technology. Back in those days it was far from uncommon that heavy Clan mechs wiped the floor with Inner Sphere assault mechs - especially at range.
@@ranekeisenkralle8265 Been a long time since I read those books.
Clan ERPPCs, 2 LRM 15s?
Seems like an Atlas should eat them at close range.
I always hated the Clans.
Clobbered the Kell Hounds.
Killed Grayson Karlyle.
Killed Natasha too.
When you mentioned when you were young and you played mechwarrior I subscribed straight away you are a legend man
The Heavy suit and spider tanks from Ghost in the shell where badass
"Howdy folks, Tex here. And we're going to talk Battletech."
"Get on Kilo like the last chopper out of 'Nam!"
I kind of was half-expecting Tex's surly whiskey soaked voice to drop in at any moment.
@@AGTheOSHAViolationsCounter Well.. I actually DID read it in "Tex". Not sure that's a good thing or a bad thing though.
@@ranekeisenkralle8265 Haha yeah so did I my friend I do the same thing when I see something on Rimworld and when I see 40k content I tend to read it in "Skeleton King". Anything WW1 or WW2 related tends to get read internally as Grandpa Tex. I've decided though it's neither a good nor bad thing it simply is what it is lol.
@@AGTheOSHAViolationsCounter 40k-stuff I tend to read in Baldermort, but alright..
" Even in death i still serve"
some mech in the future
Brother bring the Flammer
HEAVY FLAMMER
@@Ddnmddnn would my thermite launcher work instead? Oh wait I could just flame core them!
@@scorchprimethewalkingwarcrime LAUGHS IN HOLY FIRE
@@scorchprimethewalkingwarcrime of course. The more dakka, the better.
Santodes..... convince them
Im surprised titanfall footage was used but Titans themselves are not mentioned. They are probably the best interpretation of what a practical combat mech should be: a combat vehicle who's role is in the middle between and IFV and MBT doctrinally, and is designed to operate in urban environments to leverage its strengths to maximum effect while mitigating weaknesses.
The only way a walking mech can be relevant or useful when compared to wheel or track based vehicles is when you prioritize your build for agility. In other words, talk to me when your mech can scale mountains at speed, climb rock faces, fall down and get back up, change direction, sprint for long distances, ALL at speed. Then we can talk about it's viability. As of right now, even the most sophisticated walkers travel at a snails pace and can only travers half the terrain organic lifeforms can.
@@MrVkull yep. And its likely to remain the same for a while... Though synthetic muscles could change that. I mean, its one form of motive tech nothing else than a walker could take advantage of (wheels and muscle-like structures just arent compatible), and would be way more resilient to damage than hydraulics while at the same time being more powerful. In fact battletech treats that as one of the key technologies that made mechs possible (the other being the fusion reactor as a power source that can feed these muscles that always need some power imput even on idle, and the neurohelmet to help control the machine)
10:41 Everybody gangsta till the church starts walking.
How could you use titanfall's mechs in the intro without talking about them. Mat I was totally hyped and then dissapointed!😂
Very disappointed there was no mention of battletech on this list. The ultimate mech franchise.
Same here. So many iconic mechs in there. Atlas. Catapult. Marauder. MadCat. Warhammer. And who could forget the good ol' Urbie?
Ranek Eisenkralle The Battlemaster and Zeus along with the Catapult and Marauder are among my favorites. Never cared much for the Atlas.
@@centurionmbt2487 Me neither. I'm more of a fan of the King Crab. Nothing says "F*** off!" quite like a pair of AC20s. But the Atlas is decidedly iconic nonetheless. If for no other reason than Kerensky's quote about the intended design specs for the mech. "A mech as powerful as possible, as impenetrable as possible, and as ugly and foreboding as concievable - so that fear itself will be our ally."
2:00 mechwarrior is pretty close to BattleTech
Mechwarrior is Battletech
I've always seen mechs as either infantry support in a rubble filled terrain where other vehicles could easily get stuck or as massive artillery platforms with secondary direct fire capabilities. Tho the idea of just massive titanic machines making their way against enemy forces bringing down the wrath of the emperor has always been an awe inspiring thought
Wouldnt meches run the risk of falling into sewers/cellers due to the high weight localized in two small places?
@@kazak8926 he just said it would eather be for assisting in heavily destructed area or for heavy weapons platforms. Worrying about weight? Put more area to put weight
Like four legs. Other then that mechs are pointless.
@@terrelldurocher3330 But even light vehicles assisting infantry will still have the same issues. The weight of your car for example, but put into two points would probably cause the infantry support vehicle meant to help in ruined areas would fall through the rubble.
Like what happened in WW2 with tanks falling into sewers and basements through ruined buildings.
And adding a bunch of legs is also just as unlikely, why make a complex machine with alot of moving parts that can break and that can only walk at like 5mph when a wheeled or tracked artillery vehicle can do the same.
@@kazak8926 i did say all that a regarded it with saying they would be pointless you know.
@@terrelldurocher3330 oh okay
A lot of the armchair general detractors to mechs as weapons platforms seem to forget two things. The first is theater of combat, in which some make the idea of tanks and APCs particularly the ones of today's weight classes have several theaters of combat in which they are entirely ineffective. Some of those theaters mechs would be more effective. Next is the second detail they forget, turret height. Something that actually plays a role in determining the weapon types used, and role a ground combat vehicle plays.
While popular artwork will always enjoy a more human design with the weapons placed lower, or in locked positions. The advantages of a mech over a more standardized armored fighting vehicle design are actually fairly unique and ignored by popular aesthetics. A Mech can be a mobile gun tower, historically and modernly we put machine-guns and AT on upper floors of fortified buildings, we stand atop walls to shoot down at the enemy etc now we have that particularity on a mobile platform but with much more height advantage and that advantage can be taken and used in uneven terrain. and not in the smoth brain "it walk up stairs" but in the actuality of "it can stand behind something and still shoot down at the enemy granting it natural hull down advantage via terrain". And the next unique advantage that is ignored but could also be achieved by mecha designs in then variable height in the field which plays off the first, but if you have a frame that can raise and lower itself while being able to fire, you actually would in the right terrain need significantly less armor as your vehicle is able to start seeking and tanking advantage of cover more readily like a infantryman would.
A mecha isn't a tank, and should never be considered as a replacement of a tank , however where a tank and the IFV is the modern equivalent to mounted cavalry, a mech would be the equivalent of a heavily armored soldier, and when placed right they will be far more devastating to a foe than cavalry in the same placement.
I think that models such as the goliath (starcraft), black-jack, archer, and catapult make the most sense in so far as they focus on bringing firepower and mobility with as few silly weaknesses as possible(to borrow from ace combat the coffin system from the faulkner which is encase the pilot in metal and use cameras for visual) models that use arms have to deal with the possibility of said arms getting damaged and blown off (same with legs but we are going for the most practical models as opposed to being against the mech in general). Anyone who has played a mechwarrior game knows what i am talking about
"Release the final safety lock!"
"Evangelion Unit 01, lift off!"
Are they really mechs tho?
Extension cord is too short!
Biomechanical
You ever stop and think that all of NGE is Shinji being inside his mother and his dad wanting to get back inside her? 🤔
What about gundam's
I’m a bit disappointed titanfall wasn’t mentioned but then again it’s got 4 different types
The technology to imitate muscle groups exists. Finding a way to combine that with an exoskeleton and powering it for long durations would be an achievement. Mechs should be hover craft weapon ships. Warhammer 40k and the Guyver is my inspiration.
@Sowneyy 7.62 Like an avatar?
First I think we will have some sort of exo skeleton that amplifies mobility and strength mainly but it will be a bit bulky at first. Then we will probably have a light version but still looks quite large and chunky on the outside. Finally we will have something like a amp suit and advance warfare style light exo skeleton that can carry shit ton of equipments. Honestly though, Amp suit might even come out early because it’s just so believable
Small mechs could be used as infantry support in areas where wheels or tracks get bogged down and helicopters have a to short on target/ on the ready time.
Stuff like city rubble, dense forests, mountains and similarily compromising terrain.
A mech would be as much of a diva as a helicopter though most likely, so when ever possible a conventional vehicle would be more efficient.
Power armor has way more use cases, being infantry plus.
I personally see mechs as a infantry support they are highly mobile and light armored.
I think you're right. I think tracked armor is fading away.
@@WALTERBROADDUS yeah tracked armor is not as mobile and with the rise of atgms they are big, clunky and are a huge target, but mechs they could be small battery powered and would be very hard to hit with an atgm.
You know those anti-tank weapons, the large one like tows? Just duct tape some legs to it and bam, you got a mech
Yeah but honestly, they’re so cumbersome and a tank is arguably more mobile, I’d see them more in logistics then anything else
@@tristanr7799 Tracked vehicles can go more places, they have worse ground pressure and can’t go up as steep a slope. I see mechs more in the logistics role then any combat role.
Would include Front Mission 'Wanzers'. The mech is very Modular make it quite ease for maintenance and repairs. Can also customize part from different arm manufactures so you don't have to rely only on one source.
Zenith for the win
I agree. Wanzers basically evolved from tanks, an actual existing technology irl.
So I feel it has a bigger chance than others mentioned.
I know this is not the topic but I'm gonna put this in anyway:
A mech has different use cases than a tank and fits a different role. It is supposed to be a fast, mobile and adaptive(in the non-titanic cases) weapons platform than can traverse terrain that a tank can't, deploy and move faster than a tank can and change it's loadout depending on the current need. Basically they need to fit the role of a 10ft tall armored infantryman otherwise a tank is always the more effective choice.
The only exception is when they are used as an artillery piece if their legs can double as suspension since it would allow the mech to fire larger calibers with the huge recoil management that articulated legs would provide.
If the mech legs can provide suspension for an artillery piece then it should also become possible to equip them with deployable rollers or skis and jet engines and turn them into high speed weapon platforms that can carry the armament of a tank at faster speeds while at the same time traverse difficult terrain in low speed mode.
Also on the subject of articulated arms that carry weapons vs weapons being mounted directly on the chassis the argument is the same for tank turrets vs chassis mounted guns, though in the case of the mechs it makes changing weapons way easier as well as having the arm become spare parts for the leg if part interchangeability is taken to its logical extent. Same can not be said as easily about a tanks turret drive and wheel drive.
Essentially, for mechs to exist, they need to be faster than the tanks that would also exist, more mobile than them and more adaptive than them. They wouldn't be made to fight tanks their own size as such tanks will always need less to carry a mech killer gun while also have better located armor than the mech they will face. Though again that doesn't mean they are useless since by the same logic a tank is useless because helicopters can exist for the same cost. The only case in which a mech should square against a tank should be when the tank is a landship that is way larger than the mech just like the way when infantry can be used against a tank.
tl;dr: a mech is supposed to be what a tank can not be, not what a tank excels at.
Thank you for coming to my Schizo-Talk.
Yes, I know this is a Wendy's.
Yeah there are supposedly Air Breathing MPD thrusters in development so it could be possible to have a mech that can boost indefinitely given the proper powerplant (maybe Lattice Confinement Fusion?), Carbon NanoTube muscles could be made very cheaply, stronger, and smaller than conventional electric or hydraulic acutators. Potential armaments could include RArefaction waVE guNs and ATGMs and it could carry 12.7mm Machineguns as standard armaments.
@@alphatriton6621 Fusion at this point is only good for generating Ph.D's in plasma physics, and not much else. The tokamak in France has taken 20 years to get to this point and it will take 20 more to get first plasma, most likely. Lattice confinement fusion has the problem of deuterating metals, which is itself energy intensive and, it has to be said, not easily "self-started." You need a neutron beam source which itself requires a large amount of power to produce and steer to start the reactions.
Fission on the other hand, can be significantly miniaturised. A reactor the size of a dustbin can output 100MW inside a submarine. And it works, unlike fusion.
The problem remains, however, of power conversion. Nuclear reactors of fission or fusion often require very large turbomachinery. Even assuming you could get significant fusion with lattice confinement, or fission with molten salts, it would not be practical if you needed a gas turbine the size of a house to produce the electricity needed.
It's easy to produce nuclear reactions. Hell, you could make a "fusion reactor" today by making a thermonuclear warhead (the US has tens of thousands of them) and then setting it off under water inside a cave. The heat from the explosion would heat the water to boiling. Channel that steam to a turbine and you now have a working fusion reactor that also "disposes of nuclear weapons". Of course your power conversion system just also happens to be the size of a small town. As ever the downside is power conversion.
I remember making this suggestion when you did the concept tank video. Whether or not I influenced your decision I'm happy to see this!
I love the at's from armoured trooper Votoms. Like 12 feet tall. Able to move fast, cut sharp corners. Reasonably tough. The scopedog and brutishdog are just amazing.
Prawn Suit in District 9 is OP because of the gravity gun and tesla gun.
Edit:
i prefer the AMP suit in avatar. It is more closer on our todays tech.
It would be rather helpful if they were better protected, but they're pretty much repurposed industrial equipment anyways.
Credits of Prawn Suit should go to Fear 2 light mech armour. Why Fear 2 mechs light & heavy aren't mentioned at all. DP9 Heavy Gear left out too. There's Pacific Rim but there's no Robot Jox
fun fact: the behind the scenes about the Amp Suit from Avatar talks about how they are not top of the line weapons compared to what the real earth military uses but instead are repurposed utility amplified strength exo suits with some sensors and weapons attached
@@JinKee those human sky people in avatar are miners + security firms equipped with obsolete weapons permitted for private use not on par with military level. For example in 50 years later, F-15, AH-64E became obsolete being made available for security firms to use in colonial planet.
Even in death, i still serve
I have awoken.
All who oppose his will must die.
To me my brothers.
Ahh a servant of the emperor
THE BLOODY MAGPIES STOLE OUR BJORN!!! -Logan Grimnar
I’m more of a Battletech fan myself.
May God bring hell upon the Aurigan Directorate.
Walking gun platform is gonna be the light tank of the future, ability to carry any weapons would make them most versatile weapon system out there, but they wont replace the tank, because they wont have armour nor the power to weight ratio until we can shrink power systems able to move 100 ton machines around like it was a human being.
Mechs from the anime Obsolete are the 2nd best and a more likely style to have. But having a small enough power source for something like that is the issue, since we don't have access to an alien mech to use as a frame.
Massive mechs will always be my fetish. 18 meters or bigger.
The problem is that they are too maintenance heavy. Each joint and servo is a point of failure. Maybe they could be used to traverse difficult terrain that wheeled or tracked vehicles couldn't. Or something like small exo suit to increase the survivability of an individual.
In my opinion speed/mobility is the most important factor for a mech. It allows you to dictate the pace of the battle. You can engage or retreat at your own leisure.
Modern armor(such as tanks) operate under the mindset.
Don't be detected
If detected, don't be acquired
If acquired, don't be hit
If hit, don't be killed
I smaller profile has served tanks well, so too it would serve mechs as well. The bigger your mech, the bigger a target it creates and is slower.
Something along the lines of a mobile suit/Gundam where mobility and maneuverability comes first, then firepower and armor.
A better analogy would most likely be VOTOMS and Exoframes, Mobile Suits are too massive at 18+ Meters and were armored to tank hits. -Newtype abilities are also the reason why they're so effective in the first place compared to more conventional weapons-
as I said under survey: "Animatrix mechs, they looked cool despite being shattered by much stronger and bigger machine warriors in the final years of 50 years long war between humans and machines (story The Second Renaissance part II )" But also mech from District 9 is my favorite as well.
Imagine a Stridsvagn 103 but with robotic spider legs, That is what a realistic mech would resemble in the modern age.
Its only role would be to assault immobile fortified positions in/through extremely rugged natural/artificial terrain.
It would have more armor for its weight than an MBT due to the smaller internal volume by using a fully fixed gun.
Unlike continuous tracks a legged fixed gun vehicle and aim and move in any direction with redundant mobility.
Mechs would make sense in mountainous areas, overall seem very impractical considering it will need alot of moving parts for its legs
Reason why mechs haven't been an option for the military is very simple: batteries. Batteries that we use today aren't enough, or do not have a high energy density to support all the systems a mech, militarized of course, can support. Diesel isn't an options because it's loud. Yes mechs in general standing over 20ft would be noticeable but with an engine to support a mech has to be pretty big. Along with fire hazards and the lack of studying mech designs and mechs in general. Militaries wouldn't see mechs as practical bc well they are slow and can be disable more easily bc of modern tech at least in early designs. It would also be expensive to maintain. The one advantage would probably be that in closed spaces, a mech, possibly piloted by one pilot while maintaining communications on unmechanized units, can respond much more quickly within that area, but because most armies fight from a distance, there isn't really a need have that.
I think the Dreadnoughts from 40k would be a good example of what we could see. Mobile rocket launcher, heavy tank cannons or mini guns but with a trade off for speed and armour.
Being slow on the battlefield is a death sentence nowadays. A dreadnought would be bait for all anti-tank weapons on the field.
@@HubiKoshi Very true especially in urban environments. I think they would be more city limits artillery or using them as sentries for the most part.
@@zarektheinsane6656 Yeah basically mobile pillboxes. Maybe paint camo on them or hide them in the rubble where they can reasonably manoeuvre and change position and they'd do pretty well.
You know , this video kind of enforces the idea to me , that spider mechs would be more effective than bipedal ones .
True, but the maintenance and procurement of parts would be an even bigger PITA compared to using bipedal mechs
@AL HASSANE BARRY True, depends on what's used to create the components though.
Like the Just Cause 3 mech.
@@alphatriton6621 procurement of parts wouldn't be that much of an issue since you can reuse the same parts on every leg. Still a little harder to maintain than a bipedal one, but also can carry _much_ more armor and _much_ heavier weapons. Still doesn't beat a tank, but much less impractical than a humanoid one.
In a science fiction im created mechs are considered ultra heavy infantry. Serving as infantry.
Next please do a video on the Toyota Land Cruiser 70 series as its role as technicals in Africa.
One of the best untold stories of how a car in the Chadian army turned back the Libyan army who was armed with then state of the art Soviet equipment including brand new T-62 MBTs
Biggest issue with mechs is the power source I think. And I reckon it would have two main uses:
First is as a support platform that could carry equipment and work as a mobile gun emplacement. Something small enough to work in close environments where a tank might have issues. Such a platform might look a little bit like a sentinel from 40k or avatar mech (more realistic versions of course).
Second is as an exoskeleton, that would still need to be able to run alongside infantry. However, if it could I could see an exoskeleton being used to carry heavier guns that infantry would struggle with,l. Bust such a skeleton needs armour enough to stand up to most infantry rifles and handguns. That would make it struggle in swampy ground due to weight.
I can see it working a bit like fallout 4 power armour.
Both would thrive carrying support equipment, large shields to protect infantry a bit how ww1 tanks where used, communication equipment etc.
That little ramble went a bit long!
As someone who played like 300 hours on Inferno as the Air Raider in Earth Defense Force 4.1 & 5, I see the words Matsimus and Mechs in the same sentence: I GAU-8 my left mouse button
I would say that small mech style like in votom and obsolete anime would be the most practical because it would be small enough to run around in an urban environment with ease and it would not be easily spotted and blast to oblivion on open ground. These small much would be light and small enough to fight on a mountain and jungle as fire support platform but the most important fact is, it's very cheap.
Also Gears from the Heavy Gear franchise.
true, but the only reason why Exoframes are so cheap is that aliens are supplying them in exchange for limestone, trying to procure something like an exoframe would be a pain unless CNT muscles manage to leave the lab.
@@alphatriton6621 it will still be much cheaper and more effective in battle than some larger Mech because they can be field in large numbers and carry sufficient firepower with great mobility on tough terrain.
@@magellali1623 yeah I wont argue against that
You forget the greatest mech ever designed. th-cam.com/video/xOAre8wMWGU/w-d-xo.html
Think the real issue that is stopping mechs from becoming real is how do you protect the legs? A possible solution is to give them some form of close in weapon system to shoot down incoming missiles. The closest I have seen to this is the Zaku 2 from Gundam which had shrapnel bombs to take out infantry that got to close.
I mean you can make the legs heavily armored but then again that wloud make the thing slow something we don't want on a mech
@@ehsanalikhanloo3249 Tanks have had the same problem. do you want speed or amour. But if a mech gets damaged it will take more time and money to repair it then a tank. So you need a system in place to prevent as much damage as possible to the vital areas.
The US Military already has lasers on ships that are capable of taking out missiles and drones, if there was a way to scale it down into something that looks similar to a Reaper's camera then there would be no need to utilize physical APS. Of course this all relies on having a powerful and compact powerplant to drive the whole thing, maybe Lattice Confinement Fusion could be the solution.
When tanks first appeared in world war one they weren't very reliable, but scared the enemy to death. Seeing a mech the size of a skyscraper would be, I imagine, just a little bit more intimidating.
The issue is if it's a war. How the hell you gonna move that from place to place?
I can magine a walking tank in mountainous terrain. Like there are walking harvesters. But apart from that I guess that any large vehicle does better with tires or tracks.
To Matsimus: you can also refer to Iron Harvest 1922. Their battle mechs are designed in the Steampunk-style. Its arsenal is not as aggressive as the other sci-fi works, but is quite practical - in my opinion - and justified in the modern warfare's common sense.
thats dieselpunk tho
The mechs of that anime Obsolete. Perfect size and agility.
That and the Avatar movie mechs.
The First GDI Mech is called the "Wolverine" and I could definitely see it as being useful in Urban combat zones, as it could potentially enter a building while carrying heavier anti-tank weapons and enough armor to require an autocannon to defeat, though some could consider it to be Generation 0 Power Armor given it's size.
I prefer the GDI Titan but the Wolv is pretty badass too
GDI walker blobs dominate Tiberian Sun
@@zekramnordran9526 but weakness is if titan lost leg land mine become unmobilized and expensive to fix
@@murder1625 that didnt stop it from dominating the Second Tib War
For urban environments I would go with the Urbanmech-R70 variant. Sure, it is slow, but it is jump-capable and lugs around the Battletech-equivalent of the GAU-8 Avenger (the main armament of the A-10 Warthog).
@@zekramnordran9526 unfortunately the Titan in real life would not be as useful but its a really good looking mech.
It would make sense for either small support units or massive artillery platforms that wouldn't be able to get past certain terrain.
I always hate when people think of mechs as bipedal tanks, when they're not.
They're a way to apply infantry tactics on a vehicle/tank level.
They're way more fragile than a tank due to less armor and exposed joints, but their agility lets them utilize cover and concealment, such as buildings, hills and destroyed enemy tanks, making it unnecessary, whereas a tank would have half of its main body and its tracks exposed long before it could rear a corner and fire a shot from cover, not to mention exposing the fragile bottom of the tank when driving over hills to avoid direct fire. "Their high profile makes them useless" they say, as if soldiers would just stand around in the open, instead of seeking cover or going down and crawling to reduce their profile.
You'd see a track coming around a wall, you'd have plenty of time to hide or fire back.
If you suddenly saw a barrel and almost nothing else, you'd have no time to react before it started firing whatever firepower it had.
Plus, a tank is a tank. A giant hunk of armor without additional uses other than carrying firepower.
A mech can be used for combat as aforementioned, but it could also instantly just put away its gun and carry additional equipment, essentially turning into a crane/truck.
Or it can lift infantry and personel to higher ground like an elevator/ladder, or grab nearby terrain and miscelaneous items to throw them, turning into pseudo artillery. Or they could even help the aforementioned tanks drive onto the trucks needed to transport them, before just climbing on top of it themselves.
Tanks are better at being tanks.
Infantry is better at being infantry.
And mechs would be useful enough as both.
Another think regarding the mobility is that in Urban enviroment any mech can simply lift one leg and then avoid the tank , if you have a tank and there is a broken tank blocking the street there is nothing that you can do , since a broken tank is a Road blocker , but that isn't an issue if you have a mech , same thing applies to Czech hedgehogs , these easily block tanks but not mechs , so that mobility of there being nothing that can truly stop them without the use of weapons will come at handy
Tanks and helicopters have a pretty high profile if you compare them to infantry. But, I don't see anyone crusading against them even though they cost a ton to produce and maintain, and they can be taken out by cheaper ATGMs /MANPADs. The same goes for IFVs. On paper, they are nothing but shittier tanks that cost a lot more than APCs, but Ukraine just asked for 700 hundred of those damn things. Things aren't useless just because they can be destroyed.
"They're way more fragile than a tank due to less armor and exposed joints, but their agility lets them utilize cover and concealment, such as buildings, hills and destroyed enemy tanks, making it unnecessary,"
Thinking like that is what led to the battle cruiser "it's fast enough to outrun anything that can outgun it, and powerful enough to outgun anything that can keep pace with it." The problem with that is, if the battle cruiser actually does find itself in a fight with something that can threaten it, then it's too lightly armored to survive.
Look at the Battle of Jutland. Look at the battle between the Bismarck and the Hood.
The "speed is armor" philosophy is dead and buried beneath the depths of the North Sea.
"Their high profile makes them useless" they say, as if soldiers would just stand around in the open, instead of seeking cover or going down and crawling to reduce their profile."
What cover? You don't seem to understand how difficult it would be for a mech to find suitable cover under most combat scenarios. You also don't seem to understand how long it would take a mech lay down on the ground. Humans are able to do it quickly because we are small, light weight, and have little delay between our thoughts and actions. A mech in contrast would be large, weigh several tons, and would be controlled by a pilot, meaning there is a delay between them conceiving an action and then inputting it into the mech's control surfaces.
"You'd see a track coming around a wall, you'd have plenty of time to hide or fire back.
If you suddenly saw a barrel and almost nothing else, you'd have no time to react before it started firing whatever firepower it had."
Actually, you would hear both the mech and the tank long before you saw them, and you'd likely feel the vibrations in the ground form the mech's footsteps. Also, no tank would ever drive around a corner that hadn't been checked by infantry, who would immediately engage and suppress the enemy to discourage them from shooting back.
"Plus, a tank is a tank. A giant hunk of armor without additional uses other than carrying firepower."
Yes, that's what dedicated logistics vehicles are for.
"A mech can be used for combat as aforementioned, but it could also instantly just put away its gun and carry additional equipment, essentially turning into a crane/truck."
And since it's weapon is an external attachment rather than integrated into it's design, it cannot be outfitted with internal ammo storage and feeding systems, greatly reducing the amount of ammo it can carry into battle, while increasing the time it takes to reload.
"Or it can lift infantry and personel to higher ground like an elevator/ladder,"
Such a process would be slow and tedious, leaving all involved vulnerable.
"or grab nearby terrain and miscelaneous items to throw them, turning into pseudo artillery."
This would require them to holster their weapon, pick up the debris, take time to aim the debris, then wind up to throw the debris. Plenty of time for the enemy to take cover or shoot back with anti armor weapons. If you're talking about throwing at something the pilot cannot see, then there is no guarantee that the debris will not break up during its flight, causing collateral damage and potentially endangering the friendly units you are trying to support.
"Or they could even help the aforementioned tanks drive onto the trucks needed to transport them, before just climbing on top of it themselves."
Such an action greatly risks damaging the tank. Also, why would a tank need help driving onto a specially designed transport vehicle?
"Tanks are better at being tanks.
Infantry is better at being infantry.
And mechs would be useful enough as both."
No, it's the worst of both worlds.
Infantry that's too big to take cover, and a tank that is too lightly armored and armed to do any heavy fighting.
@@ulforcemegamon3094 Actually, they can be stopped quite easily by the same stuff that stops tanks. You just have to make it bigger to account for the increase in size.
A deeper, denser field of Czech hedgehogs so the mech can't step over or around them.
A wider, deeper anti-tank trench so the mech can't step over it.
Drag more broken vehicles onto the road you expect the tank to walk down.
@@schibleh531 No one is saying mechs are useless because they can be destroyed. We're saying they're useless because everything they could do can already be done by something that would be way less maintenance intensive. The few advantages they could theoretically offer are too niche to justify the massive investment they would be.
The bigger they are, the harder they fall. No matter what the technology is regarding mech suit warfare there will always be a weapon to take them down. In addition, way too many moving parts that can go wrong. What is realistic are armored exoskeletons. It's all about stealth, speed, and maneuverability in a small technology advanced package.
Pretty much my thought. Tracked vehicles require a huge amount of maintenance to keep running, the added complexity of a bipedal 'walker' would require far, far more. Another issue that comes to mind is also ground pressure, a tracked vehicle spreads its mass over a relatively large area, even wheeled vehicles have at least 4 main points of contact. Bipedal vehicles have only 2 points of contact, thus increasing the ground pressure, which would actually *reduce* mobility in rough or soft terrain in comparison to a tracked vehicle of similar weight.
@@alganhar1 Tracked vehicles require less maintenance than a 6x6 or 8x8 wheeled vehicle. They have less strategic mobility, but greater tactical mobility compared to wheeled vehicles. The primary disadvantage of tracked vehicles for strategic mobility is that their tracks destroy asphalt, and also the tracks themselves overheat and break down on long road marches. Fully rubber or partially rubberised tracks, road wheels and return rollers significantly reduce rolling resistance though, and modern tanks can go a lot further. Still not as far as a 6x6 or 8x8 but if you're routinely doing 500km+ road marches, you've either already won and are advancing unopposed; or you've lost so badly that you have to retreat to the other side of the country. I don't see super long road marches as anything other than dick measuring for its own sake.
I don't think that a 6x6 wheeled vehicle with independant tyre inflation systems, mine-resistant suspension arms, and 3 times the locking differentials that a conventional car has, is going to be somehow that much less maintenance than a tank, which just has the drive sprocket and track segments to take care of. Most tanks use torsion bars which are almost maintenance free, and rubberised road wheels are non-pneumatic, so only require inspection. No pressure checks. Tracks _will_ break before differentials and suspension arms, but track segment repair is a half hour job on the roadside. A borked suspension arm or differential means withdrawal to the motorpool.
Obviously the armoured exoskeleton, or the walker unit would require much more maintenance than either. This was the main reason why the forestry walking machine, the Timberjack, failed to find commercial success: th-cam.com/video/CD2V8GFqk_Y/w-d-xo.html .
**
So, to summarize, here are the characteristics a mech should have:
1) They should have better terrain mobility than tanks
2) They should be relatively tall, articulating weapons platforms (to help them attack, defend themselves, and seek targets in novel ways)
3) They should operate in a way, where they supplement, and support tanks. Not replace them.
*(This could happen, since the suspension of mechs are built differently than that of tanks. Meaning that the benefits they get from their special suspension/locomotion must be "balanced" by the compromises they need to take, in order to get said benefits)*
This should be done by exploiting favorable terrain to out-flank, or avoid fortifications, and enemy concentrations. Also, by out-flanking they should work to compromise defensive positions to help the tanks break thru.
Also, they should be employed in a way to use their favored terrain, to defend, and make it difficult as heck for the enemy's advance (thru said terrain, or near it).
*(Side note. You may have noticed that tanks can be improved in all sorts of ways to remain competitive with any potential mech. However, all the tank-based technologies we've talked about, all have traits of mechs, in one way, or the other. So, this only further proves that mechs are militarily useful. And also, even in the worse case scenario, if mechs were somehow still not considered necessary, the technologies that exhibit their traits are more than useful enough in improving tracked/wheeled vehicles. So, technically the mech wins out in the end. In one way, or the other)*
*(So, in my opinion. I think something like DARPA's Ground-X vehicle, some heavy armour, a turret, a 40-90mm caliber gun/autocannon, and maybe some missiles would seem nice. Also if it can also side strafe like a boss like the Panhard CRAB, then that would be SUPER AWESOME 🤟🤟🤟)*
*(If a 4 legged mech looks like DARPA's GXV, then I guess, a 6, or 8 legged mech would look something like the "Future Protected Vehicle" concept)*
www.thinkdefence.co.uk/2012/11/the-tank-is-dead-long-live-the-tank-part-5-future-protected-vehicles/
What about Exosquad? I know there are a lot of variations. But some really good options.
I suspect they'd be like the Titans from Titanfall or War Robots, nothing big and flashy just two legs, maybe two arms and a mix of autocannons and ATMs. They'd certainly be useful in urban or airborne operations where you need a flexible, lightweight vehicle. Whether or not they'd have AI, idk.
The sponsor reminds me of the good old day in my junior high school... when it game was called walking war robots and not being a p2w game
If built as a modular platform, I could see a variety of roles a manned/unmanned mech would be a game changer in... They don't even need to be as large/heavy as MBT's... Sorry, was really into AC as a teenager/young adult.. always thought it was the best way to implement mech technology...
I actually think titans have it right on 3 counts (please consider each mech in it's own universe). 1. Ground pressure, most mechs will get bugged down in mud or fall through bridges. Titans are big enough to hit bedrock - or have anti-gravitic engines. 2. Power supply. These aren't going to run on petrol. The 40k universe has power sources with sufficient density to actualy make them mobile. 3. Control interface. A couple of joysticks isn't going to be enough for complex movement: a mind interface unit linking you to a psychotic AI... now you're talking.
Good points. And then there is the sheer amount of god-emperor-darn armor and void shields on those things. Good luck at stopping one of those things if it for some reason happens to be mad at you... "You and which army?" *gestures at the glassed landscape outside*
I'd imagine the Avatar mech really being the only viable mech, and only if it's not used in a combat role. I'd imagine it would be great for combat engineers where the mech could replace a lot of the vehicles used for heavy lifting.
Until the pilot gets shot out but otherwise yes
titanfall mechs are more viable as military mechs, they are big but not too big, and most of all they were originally used as agriculture equipment and for space exploration due to their sturdy chassis and they are literally programmed to protect the pilot, they are also efficient since if you didn't notice their batteries are actually the armor charge batteries from apex meaning they are easy to maintain since parts for a titan is compatible with a lot of human-sized equipment not to mention it has a far longer operation time, they can be used for utilities and when a combat situation arises you don't even need to give it a gun since it is already combat capable with its built-in weaponry and its sheer force and durability alone
They can be damaged by a 20mm canon. Most modern weapon systems, including shoulder fired rockets, would make short work of them.
With advancements in technology, I am 100% sure that mechs will become a common sight in wars of the future. Our modern day tech makes it impractical, but improved motor tech, improved armor tech, etc will all make mechs practical and useful in the future. I honestly believe that tanks will be rendered obsolete by mechs in the future. Hell, tanks are almost obsolete now. I've seen people say a mech could never be practical or is not suitable for war, but that is just folly. In 1855, many said that a rifle holding more than one shot would never be useful to your average infantryman. In 1913, people thought that airplanes had no viable use in warfare. During WW2, some in Hitler's cabinet thought the idea of a guided long range missile was a novelty. In the late 40s, many laughed at the idea of a helicopter having a real use in conflict. New ideas are always treated like a toy...until they work. I am confident that 100, maybe even just 50 or so years from now, a legged combat mech design, more agile and more capable than a tank with equal or better armor and weapons will walk the battlefield and be the new standard for armored warfare.
The problem is that all those armor and motor technology improvements could also be applied to a tank…
@@mr.tweaty A tank would never have the agility of a mech, thus rendering it obsolescent.
9:24 I always thought Metal Gear REX is what you'd get if you tried to make a bipedal mech with the aesthetics of an Abrams Tank. It was incredibly fun to pilot it in MGS4 and no knee joint weakspots!
I think the Avatar AMP, 40k Sentinel, or the Adeptus Mechanicus four-legged Dunecrawler would be most practical IRL mostly due to increased rough-terrain mobility, anything bigger is just too big and clumsy.
I miss Heavy Gear 2. It was a Win98 title based on a tabletop game from Dreampod 9. The Gears were only about 3-4 meters tall.
Played the hell out of Armored Core on Playstation as well.
I have a feeling that the more humanity desires mecha, the greater the chances of them being a thing.
imagine the one who built the first plane to fly
and a touchscreen phone from startrek still a thing now
I think what would the best mech for modern warfare are chromehounds mechs.
12:12-12:18 Yeah. But it was a real shame that the controller didn't worked out. People had a pointlessly difficult time of operating the
motion-controlled controller. But, when it worked......goddamn, it feels sooooooooooooooooooo good
I’ve always thought mechs work well in a short range roll like a heavily armed mech from a helicopter or something to provide fire support for ground troops in a roll that you can’t with a tank in urban environments.
It'd probably be more reasonable for them to be a long ranged fire support. Like the Walkers from Metal Gear solid 5. Fast moving, small, easily ditchable, highly customizable, support units.
At that point why wouldn't Just get a Attack Helicopter, Outfit it with more Armor, More Weapons and Powerful Guns, Instead of just hauling some large weight around? And Tanks absolutetly can give Fire Support in Urban Environments, they form a Crucial Part of Urban Warfare Doctrine for the military, Just like At the US in Iraq and The Soviets in Afghanistan.
You triggered my Chrome Hounds nostalgia and now I'm sad.
Just imagine a war between India and China in Himalayas Mountain
a Mecha can walk between the valleys and give massive casualties to the infantry it may vulnerable to anti tank rocket but there are Hard-kill countermeasure systems like Trophy also automated gun turrets can response fire toward the direction of incoming fire via the subsonic waves like Boomerang system
it reach to the tall rock then uses it rocket boosters to jump up and land on the higher ground then it uses its heat seeking loitering air burst mini-rockets to Target remaining infantry who may hiding for a possible ambush then uses its engineering device to make climbing facilities for the friendly infantry
The most practical place for mechs would be in the rear with the gear. The big legs and hands could be used to lift things. You could never armor it enough to be survivable. But its ability to lift things and flip over stick vehicles or knock over walls and doors would be key.
That's what cranes and forklifts are for.
Just a question Matsimus, have you heard of the team from Vancouver who made a functional mech? The mech is apparently intended for racing. It's a big four-legged vehicle that's really cool.
Furrion Exo-Bionics: th-cam.com/users/FurrionExoBionicsvideos
Just wanted to hear from an artilleryman on how their mech design could possibly be used as a weapons platform.
I'm trying to go to sleep and you give me what I always wanted I don't know how to feel
Damn I used to play War Robots waaay back in the day and loved it. Good to see you too enjoy this game
It's very pay to win now.
@@matthewarnold4557 That's a shame
if I had to choes what mech I would use in sci fi warfare
I would definantly pick the highlander assault mech from BattleTech, that mech is a beast and piloted by a beast.
You said “Mech Warrior “!! I loved that game.
10:58 Now this actually looks relatively (close to) reasonable for actual service
I remember watching Mech's in Avatar as a kid.
I feel like reporting your comment for harrassment.... you made me feel old af
When someone say mech is useless in battlefield but then u saw a church walking towards you
Lol. That is one hell of a Jehovah's witness at ur door m8
"Hullo good sir. Do you have some time to talk about our lord, and savior? *TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTHE EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEMPEROR?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?* "
🤣🤣🤣
*HOLY MUSIC INTENSIFIES*
More like a cathedral with surrounding fortress, if you are referring to an Imperator-class Titan. Those things are absolutely massive.
Come to Chruch before the Church comes to you
@@forickgrimaldus8301 and that includes orbital insertion, yes. Just think about how massive a drop-pod has to be that is supposed to land an Imperator-class Titan.
Heck, the sheer impact force would have to result in a bit of an earthquake - even if slowed down significantly.
I was actually hoping you would dive into specific designs that could be used on the modern battlefield.
How about designs that combine wheels with legs.
Mechs would realistically only be effective as guard and defensive duty.. forces attackers to focus their fire and attention. IRL what ground troops have learned to do is just put down a lot of small arms fire to force targets to remain relatively stationary while they laze the target and call in missiles and artillery.