Leopard 2A7I vs RX-78-2 Gundam

[chitoryu12]

I'd say the beam spray gun was actually superior for fighting unless you were doing long range sniping; it has less power than the Gundam's beam rifle, but you don't NEED the power to shoot straight through a battleship and cause collateral damage to whatever's on the other side. Fire a wider beam that hits with enough force to do serious damage, and you're blowing a larger section of the suit apart. It's like the Federation was a bunch of cops and the Zakus were half-naked rednecks with shotguns, and the Gundam was shooting depleted uranium .300 Win Mag rounds while everyone else just loaded up some hollow points and went to town.

[Stark]

Or I fields were in their infancy and especially Zeon struggled to make decent and efficient beam guns.

I'm told when the OP made the same thread again elsewhere he used the Strike instead of the RX-78, which is at least more interesting.

[chitoryu12]

Found it.

There's at least a better source he provided, but it's still hideously vague. Apparently the anti-beam coating can take "low town level heat", which is word salad. Destructive capacity is "Street level+ w/ machineguns, large building level w/ its main cannon". That's barely even a coherent sentence. It can destroy a street with its 7.62mm machine guns? Or all the buildings on a street?

And again, armor is basically "CARBON NANOTUBEZ".

Is there any actual available source from the canon that shows what this damn tank can do? All I see right now is a lot of meaningless babble that implies that a single tank no larger than any modern MBT is a rolling fortress that can absorb multiple shots from a battleship-level particle beam gun while blowing it to pieces with one shot of a 120mm cannon.

[Zinegata]

If I remember correctly, beam weapons are simply the UC form of particle beam weapons. Minovsky particles are fused into mega particles, which are massive and electrically neutral. Contain them in an I-Field lattice and launch it at a target.

Yep. Don't ask me to compute how much damage this translate to however :p.

Except we see armour being effective against various beam weapons. Anyone can just pick up a silly huge power gun, but most suits don't (especially later in UC where many suits use increasingly low-power weapons). This reaches an extreme at Torrington where beam SMG fire is pretty ineffective against Zee Zulus while doing fine against most of the older suits. Treating 'beam weapons' as a homogenous group is wrong.

Actually, the later guns don't necessarily lose power - since the principle and relative outputs seem to remain the same; and we see battleships getting less and less inclined to mix it up with Mobile Suits (those that do tend to explode very quickly).

Instead what we may be seeing is that the newer Mobile Suits have incoporated some level of anti-beam coating in their armor, which is absent from older models (like the old Zakus who never had to face beam-rifle totting Mobile Suits in the first place). The shield is still the strongest bit (which is why it can take a direct hit and shrug it of) but newer suits may now have some level of anti-beam coating so that they aren't just one-shot-one-kill victims to beam rifle fire in case they do get hit. Having Zee Zulus emerge fine from beam fire while olders suits don't seems to fit with this general idea.

Back in the RX-78-2 era, only the shield may have really adopted this type of protection (because nobody else was totting beam weapons except battleships), but by Zeta full-body beam protection may have been available, which is why we get largely shield-less Mobile Suits like the Rick Dias and the Hyaku Shiki (the former of which is a test bed for a more expensive new armor; which is notably not used on the once again shield-totting Jegans in CCA).

And literally no non I-field shield ever reflects anything. Even modern shields vs old Axis suits show the blast being dispersed and deformed by the shield rather than 'reflected'.

I did say anti-beam coating was nebulous.

[Zinegata]

Found it.

There's at least a better source he provided, but it's still hideously vague. Apparently the anti-beam coating can take "low town level heat", which is word salad. Destructive capacity is "Street level+ w/ machineguns, large building level w/ its main cannon". That's barely even a coherent sentence. It can destroy a street with its 7.62mm machine guns? Or all the buildings on a street?

Given the unique nature of Gundam beam mechanics I am tempted to say that regular laser difusion techniques may not necessarily work on them, so you can't really use Mu Luv anti-beam stuff to counter the very specific Gundam Minovsky beam tech.

[Stark]

Well it has an anti laser coating. :v He never backed up his statements, which is why people ended up just talking about gundam.

Oh Jesus Christ. Amusingly capital ship durability is a good data point for shifting armor and weapon power and role. The are late UC weapons that are obviously designed to be low power, and the beam magnum is an obvious throwback to silly original beam rifle power levels. There's even a whole battle that showcases shifting priorities over time in unicorn.

In what way does it require 'unique nature' for an anti laser coating to not work on a particle beam?

[chitoryu12]

In what way does it require 'unique nature' for an anti laser coating to not work on a particle beam?

It depends on how the anti-laser coating works. The Gundam coating (which was made useless by mega particle beams) simply reflect certain wavelengths of light. I think the guy said that Muv-Luv tanks have ablative armor, so it'll just boil away to dissipate the heat.

I can't even find proper resources on Muv-Luv energy weapons. If it's ablative coating, then it's going to be radiating a ton of heat even if it properly absorbs the energy of the shot; it'll probably end up setting the nearby foliage on fire and cooking the crew. And again, Gundam beam weapons are particle beam guns. The beam itself has mass, meaning it has kinetic energy. And that energy is enough to, again, go through an entire space capital ship. Is that energy supposed to just disappear because ABLATIVE ARMOR and TEH CARBON TUBES? If the tank took zero damage because of its magical armor, that kinetic energy is still going to send it flying across the battlefield. It's probably going to land upside-down and the crew will have shattered every bone in their body.

[Stark]

He doesn't know, dude. That's why he stopped posting.

And guns that punch right through 30m asteroids probably aren't going to wait for an ablation process.

[Zinegata]

Oh Jesus Christ. Amusingly capital ship durability is a good data point for shifting armor and weapon power and role. The are late UC weapons that are obviously designed to be low power, and the beam magnum is an obvious throwback to silly original beam rifle power levels. There's even a whole battle that showcases shifting priorities over time in unicorn.

I don't really think you can be "low level" with "capital-ship" level guns .

There can certainly be nuances to beam rifle outputs - see the VSBR (Variable Speed Beam Rifle) in F91, which can shift to either a low-speed beam for "raw damage" or a very high-speed beam that can punch through even an I-field (which also implies that the penetration power of a beam rifle is related to the velocity at which it discharges its mega-particles, whereas long-term exposure to the megaparticles does more damage).

But I think that even at the lowest setting beams should still have their armor chewing power - else why bother with them? If your beam weaponry is going to act just like a 90mm SMG, then you may as well just carry one - which is exactly what some Mobile Suits do during the Zeta period (and I think a couple more in CCA). The only reason I can think of why they'd use low-power beam weapons later on is because they've miniaturized beam tech to a much greater degree (a strong possibility) that it's now superior to carry a light low-power beam gun than a traditional 90mm SMG.

[chitoryu12]

It reminds me of how comic book superheroes with invulnerability still get knocked all over the place from superpowered punches or getting hit by a truck or whatnot. Except in this case, the 100% invulnerable tank still has a 100% vulnerable crew inside. That acceleration's going to be kickass.

The tank's not invulnerable, of course. If it got shot with a beam rifle, it would evaporate. It's just that I love it when people forget that kinetic energy still exists.

There can certainly be nuances to beam rifle outputs - see the VSBR (Variable Speed Beam Rifle) in F91, which can shift to either a low-speed beam for "raw damage" or a very high-speed beam that can punch through even an I-field (which also implies that the penetration power of a beam rifle is related to the velocity at which it discharges its mega-particles).

Well, an I-Field simply repulses the mega particles, which have mass. It's not a magical barrier; it still operates based on physics (at least in universe, when they're not pulling out all the anime stops). If you hit it hard enough, something's gotta give.

[Zinegata]

Well, an I-Field simply repulses the mega particles, which have mass. It's not a magical barrier; it still operates based on physics (at least in universe, when they're not pulling out all the anime stops). If you hit it hard enough, something's gotta give.

Hmmm, how would the low-velocity setting work for doing more "raw damage" though? Obviously it would have less kinetic energy and consquently should do less damage, unless there's something I missed from a real-world physics standpoint (in-universe I just hand wave it as the VSBR having a long range beam spray gun setting).

[chitoryu12]

But I think that even at the lowest setting beams should still have their armor chewing power - else why bother with them? If your beam weaponry is going to act just like a 90mm SMG, then you may as well just carry one - which is exactly what some Mobile Suits do during the Zeta period (and I think a couple more in CCA). The only reason I can think of why they'd use low-power beam weapons later on is because they've miniaturized beam tech to a much greater degree (a strong possibility) that it's now superior to carry a light low-power beam gun than a traditional 90mm SMG.

In canon (notwithstanding sudden violations of canon and often logic), mega particle beams fly at near light speed. The only way to dodge a beam weapon is to not have it pointed at you. The point behind the beam smart gun in Gundam Sentinel was to make that even harder by being capable of bending the beam as it came out, so you didn't even need to point it directly at the target to make a hit.

Hmmm, how would the low-velocity setting work for doing more "raw damage" though? Obviously it would have less kinetic energy and consquently should do less damage, unless there's something I missed from a real-world physics standpoint (in-universe I just hand wave it as the VSBR having a long range beam spray gun setting).

I think it's analogous to what I said earlier about depleted uranium rifle rounds vs. hollow points. At such high speeds, the beam simply passes through a target and puts a hole in it no larger than the width of the beam itself. At lower velocity, you've got a less coherent beam that has less raw kinetic energy but hits a wider spot. It's what I said before about the GM's beam spray gun: it fires something that's good enough (instead of being extremely overpowered and capable of even slicing through battleships) that hits a larger area, thus causing more damage. Something that can't fully penetrate a mobile suit but can cover an area half the size of its torso is superior in killing mobile suits to a beam that passes straight through it and is barely wider than the cockpit.

[Zinegata]

In canon (notwithstanding sudden violations of canon and often logic), mega particle beams fly at near light speed. The only way to dodge a beam weapon is to not have it pointed at you. The point behind the beam smart gun in Gundam Sentinel was to make that even harder by being capable of bending the beam as it came out, so you didn't even need to point it directly at the target to make a hit.

+

I think it's analogous to what I said earlier about depleted uranium rifle rounds vs. hollow points. At such high speeds, the beam simply passes through a target and puts a hole in it no larger than the width of the beam itself. At lower velocity, you've got a less coherent beam that has less raw kinetic energy but hits a wider spot. It's what I said before about the GM's beam spray gun: it fires something that's good enough (instead of being extremely overpowered and capable of even slicing through battleships) that hits a larger area, thus causing more damage. Something that can't fully penetrate a mobile suit but can cover an area half the size of its torso is superior in killing mobile suits to a beam that passes straight through it and is barely wider than the cockpit.

Yeah, that makes sense.

[chitoryu12]

Though, again, it took time for beam weapons to disseminate as standard issue across the board. The Gundam's rifle was on the capital ship level of power, but you had 16 shots and then you're done. Beam spray guns seem to really be best at close range, and mainly for fighting mobile suits; a big beam rifle can take out capital ships from long range, while anything with less armor than a mobile suit can easily be taken down by conventional arms. Not to mention all the added expense and complexity of building large amounts of particle beam guns and reactors to charge them when you can just build 90mm autocannons. Part of the process for making energy weapons a viable alternative to conventional ones (instead of specialty weapons or being issued to super prototypes) meant dialing down the complexity and power. That's really the only reason capital ships remained viable for combat in the Universal Century at all: if every mass produced space combat vehicle could carry a weapon that fired a near light speed particle beam powerful enough to blow a dreadnought apart with two or three shots and carried enough ammo to take out half a dozen ships by itself, along with being a fraction of the size of said ships, why would you bother sending in massive capital ships anyway instead of a smaller and more maneuverable mech? Because in the Universal Century, said energy weapons were uncommon and expensive and needed to be made much less powerful to actually become mass produced.

[Zinegata]

Actually, capital ships by the Zeta era very rarely engaged close-in with enemy Mobile Suits - the intention clearly being that capital ships were now strictly carriers and long-ranged fire support ships rather than things that can go head-to-head with enemy Mobile Suits. Your own Mobile Suits need a place to go home to after a mission after all.

(Note the changes in the Salamis class - which went from six main guns to four to accomodate an MS hanger. In addition, the guns were now forward or rear-firing only instead of the old multi-directional configuration - clearly a design for long-ranged shooting and not for something that will get into the middle of a melee)

When the capital ships get into MS-fighting range, the general result is that capital ships went boom unless their own Mobile Suits were there to protect them.

It wasn't until the Victory Gundam era that we see battleships that could actually last in the thick of a battle again - but by then they now had new-fangled beam shields.

[Stark]

Please. The Salamis was converted like that because the Federation needed a stopgap solution. They keep making ships with a heavy gun and missile armament until the end up UC. Amusingly Unicorn makes it pretty explicit that the characteristic loss of capital ships was a result of the newtype phenomenon and not some rigid law you might read on a poorly researched wiki. The funniest shit is when fans declare something 'outdated' or 'failed' and then it turns up later anyway because their fanfiction is actually just made up. Anyway, since mobile suits are space fighters with extremely powerful weapons but poor range, why would anyone consider either their effectiveness or the retention of capital ships noteworthy?

PS anyone saying beam weapons fire at near light speed is blind. Anyone who says 'beam weapons' as a homogenous group are 'capital ship level' is an idiot who probably uses a single poorly informed piece of dialog as a fact.

PROTIP: Garancieres being near missed (ten meters or more) by a Clop melts the hull; being shot repeatedly with beam rifles does nothing. It's pretty obvious that endurance in battle is more important than how much your beam overpenetrates a suit, and heavy targets have a range of dedicated weapons to destroy them. Unless fans want to tell me the newest and best mass production EFSF suits using SMGs is bad and wrong because of their preconceptions?

[chitoryu12]

Actually, capital ships by the Zeta era very rarely engaged close-in with enemy Mobile Suits - the intention clearly being that capital ships were now strictly carriers and long-ranged fire support ships rather than things that can go head-to-head with enemy Mobile Suits. Your own Mobile Suits need a place to go home to after a mission after all.

(Note the changes in the Salamis class - which went from six main guns to four to accomodate an MS hanger. In addition, the guns were now forward or rear-firing only instead of the old multi-directional configuration - clearly a design for long-ranged shooting and not for something that will get into the middle of a melee)

When the capital ships get into MS-fighting range, the general result is that capital ships went boom unless their own Mobile Suits were there to protect them.

It wasn't until the Victory Gundam era that we see battleships that could actually last in the thick of a battle again - but by then they now had new-fangled beam shields.

The Gundam has a pretty damn long range, though. If it can get close enough to target the ship, it can put a hole straight through it. And that beam is traveling too fast for ANYTHING to dodge. Most other mobile suits don't have weapons with comparable range and power, especially Zakus. Their advantage isn't firepower as much as it is maneuverability and relatively small size.

Exactly what IS the range on a GM's beam spray gun?

[Stark]

You know, I'm pretty sure it's Zeta where Char fires and someone on a bridge has time to say 'hey sir Char just shot us' and the captain to say 'OH NOEZ' before it hits. :V

[chitoryu12]

You know, I'm pretty sure it's Zeta where Char fires and someone on a bridge has time to say 'hey sir Char just shot us' and the captain to say 'OH NOEZ' before it hits. :V

Canon tends to just disappear whenever convenient. Sometimes the beam shoots so fast that even a Newtype couldn't dodge it, and sometimes it's moving so slow that you wonder how NOBODY can dodge it. The off-model mistakes and low animation quality in early shows just make it all worse.

[Connor MacLeod]

Or maybe not all beam weaponry is the same? Its not like they come in a uniform size/shape/design after all, even within broad categories.

[Stark]

Canon tends to just disappear whenever convenient. Sometimes the beam shoots so fast that even a Newtype couldn't dodge it, and sometimes it's moving so slow that you wonder how NOBODY can dodge it. The off-model mistakes and low animation quality in early shows just make it all worse.

There is no 'canon'. If you're going to make the claim that beam weapons move at light speed when I don't think they are ever in 30 years shown to do this and frequently shown to not do this and then just claim OH LOL ANIMATION ERROR, that's remarkable.

Shit, even the Hyper Mega Particle Launcher beam didn't travel at lightspeed.

I'm not sure what the appeal is of ignoring the actual show in question in favour of something one might read in a magazine or wiki article is, to be honest.

[chitoryu12]

Or maybe not all beam weaponry is the same? Its not like they come in a uniform size/shape/design after all, even within broad categories.

You don't get consistency even with a single specific gun, let alone a single model. One of the things that makes Gundam difficult to analyze is because even without the stylized content, animation mistakes, poor scripting, and off-model drawings make it more difficult to properly figure out just what's meant to be happening. The New MS Encyclopedia at least acts as a consistent source.

[Stark]

Oh jesus christ.

In Unicorn 2, Char attacks the Argama. His gun melts AA gun turrets to slag, punches through mobile suits to surgically detonate their reactors, and leaves small red dots on the bridge hull. Is this 'poor scripting' or an 'animation error'? Or do beam weapons just have variable power levels? One of these approaches requires actually thinking.

[Zinegata]

Please. The Salamis was converted like that because the Federation needed a stopgap solution.

The stopgaps existed known as the Vinision plan Salamis, seen in the original series, which didn't change the gun layout and were advancing up to point-blank range against enemy Mobile Suits. In Zeta we don't see this same sort of point-blank bloody-mindedness anymore.

They keep making ships with a heavy gun and missile armament until the end up UC. Amusingly Unicorn makes it pretty explicit that the characteristic loss of capital ships was a result of the newtype phenomenon and not some rigid law you might read on a poorly researched wiki. The funniest shit is when fans declare something 'outdated' or 'failed' and then it turns up later anyway because their fanfiction is actually just made up. Anyway, since mobile suits are space fighters with extremely powerful weapons but poor range, why would anyone consider either their effectiveness or the retention of capital ships noteworthy?

The Federation actually sort of stops making new ships beyond the Ra Cailum class, which is why even Salamis class ships are brought out of mothballs in Victory. They do have heavy gun and missile armament, but the point is that they generally aren't sent into melees anymore like the bruhaha of Solomon or A Bao A Qu - ships instead hang back and provide cover fire. If they get close, somebody screams "It's a Gundam!" on the bridge and dies.

PS anyone saying beam weapons fire at near light speed is blind. Anyone who says 'beam weapons' as a homogenous group are 'capital ship level' is an idiot who probably uses a single poorly informed piece of dialog as a fact.

Great, glad to see that you ignored my entire conversation where I said there were nuances to Gundam beam weapons.

Fuck off then, troll. I thought you finally grew up.

[Zinegata]

Or maybe not all beam weaponry is the same? Its not like they come in a uniform size/shape/design after all, even within broad categories.

Hence my mention of the VSBR, which is the original beam weapon (in real life introduction anyway) with variable beam settings and some actual general mechanics on how it works (aside from "scaled up real-life analogue" like the beam SMG).

Basically, it has a "high speed" setting which allows it to penetrate shields, and a "low speed" setting which pumps out more raw damage.

I questioned the need for an overly low-power beam weapon, because again that sort of gun makes very little sense. Why go through the hassle of making a beam weapon if its damage output is just the same as a 90mm MG? Two good answers is a) Beam weapons have faster projectiles than shells which should make them more accurate / harder to dodge, or b) They were now able to miniaturize beam weapons to the point that a low-power beam rifle is much lighter than the 90mm MG, which has to carry the weight of all its ammo.