SF Military Tropes

[lance]

Off of my head, super robot wars had that tiger/dragon mech and the prototypes being vastly superior to production models, Vanguard Bandits had the excavated ATACs, Zoids had the Deathsaurer, Megaman X had X and Zero, Guyver had the Guyver units. American Knights had the main characters power armor, Marvel has the killer robot on agents of atlas. Thats all I got.

[Samuel]

Wouldn't "prototypes are better" be an example of something unjustified? Sure it might have something that is too expensive to mass produce... but if it is a prototype, they haven't gotten the bugs worked out of the system yet either.

[Bakustra]

Off of my head, super robot wars had that tiger/dragon mech and the prototypes being vastly superior to production models, Vanguard Bandits had the excavated ATACs, Zoids had the Deathsaurer, Megaman X had X and Zero, Guyver had the Guyver units. American Knights had the main characters power armor, Marvel has the killer robot on agents of atlas. Thats all I got.

Most of those aren't really a good example of "older is better" and there's generally a good reason, storywise, why the prototype would be superior to the production model in giant robot shows. Generally, the hero is either piloting the prototype and fighting groups of the production models, in which case he triumphs because he is the hero, or the prototype is piloted by a particularly dangerous foe, in which case it has to stand out from the production models to be a clear threat to the hero. In both cases, the superiority of the prototype flows from the necessities of the story.

[Samuel]

Off of my head, super robot wars had that tiger/dragon mech and the prototypes being vastly superior to production models, Vanguard Bandits had the excavated ATACs, Zoids had the Deathsaurer, Megaman X had X and Zero, Guyver had the Guyver units. American Knights had the main characters power armor, Marvel has the killer robot on agents of atlas. Thats all I got.

Most of those aren't really a good example of "older is better" and there's generally a good reason, storywise, why the prototype would be superior to the production model in giant robot shows. Generally, the hero is either piloting the prototype and fighting groups of the production models, in which case he triumphs because he is the hero, or the prototype is piloted by a particularly dangerous foe, in which case it has to stand out from the production models to be a clear threat to the hero. In both cases, the superiority of the prototype flows from the necessities of the story.

Why not simply have the different in performance be a matter of skill? After all they are supposed to be better.

[Bakustra]

Most of those aren't really a good example of "older is better" and there's generally a good reason, storywise, why the prototype would be superior to the production model in giant robot shows. Generally, the hero is either piloting the prototype and fighting groups of the production models, in which case he triumphs because he is the hero, or the prototype is piloted by a particularly dangerous foe, in which case it has to stand out from the production models to be a clear threat to the hero. In both cases, the superiority of the prototype flows from the necessities of the story.

Why not simply have the different in performance be a matter of skill? After all they are supposed to be better.

That works. The superiority is rarely given by the show in bald technical terms, say

ANALYST DUDE: Oh my god! It's Lord Sneezesblood! And he's piloting the prototype Gila unit! It can fire like eighteen particle beams at once, man! We haven't got a chance. Let's run while we still can.
SECRET HERO MAN: No way. I have a score to settle with him. He destroyed my ice cream store. Eighteen particle beams? I care not. He would need a dozen times as many to penetrate my willpower!
ROCKIN' FIGHT SCENE, INVOLVING EIGHTEEN PARTICLE BEAMS AND A LAST-MINUTE VICTORY THROUGH ROBOT UPPERCUT.

So it really depends on what you think is more important, since what we usually get is important characters piloting prototypes, so whether it is skill or technology is a matter of opinion in most cases.

[lance]

Off of my head, super robot wars had that tiger/dragon mech and the prototypes being vastly superior to production models, Vanguard Bandits had the excavated ATACs, Zoids had the Deathsaurer, Megaman X had X and Zero, Guyver had the Guyver units. American Knights had the main characters power armor, Marvel has the killer robot on agents of atlas. Thats all I got.

Most of those aren't really a good example of "older is better" and there's generally a good reason, storywise, why the prototype would be superior to the production model in giant robot shows. Generally, the hero is either piloting the prototype and fighting groups of the production models, in which case he triumphs because he is the hero, or the prototype is piloted by a particularly dangerous foe, in which case it has to stand out from the production models to be a clear threat to the hero. In both cases, the superiority of the prototype flows from the necessities of the story.

Why not simply have the different in performance be a matter of skill? After all they are supposed to be better.

Super Robot Wars and Vanguard Bandits are games, and the prototypes/excavated Atacs have higher stats/armor/unstable super gun and more hp. So that doesn't work.

[lance]

Also Warhamer 40k, which is the obvious one.

[Sarevok]

Also Warhamer 40k, which is the obvious one.

How so ? The fluff makes it pretty clear even in overt terms the Imperium is less advanced in some areas because of how much was lost in over thousands years of cataclysmic warfare.

[The Yosemite Bear]

Well I was thinking Nadesco, Bolo, etc.

hey look it's a shot to shit, obsolete bolo, it will save us all from aliens/mercs with good tech...

[lance]

Also Warhamer 40k, which is the obvious one.

How so ? The fluff makes it pretty clear even in overt terms the Imperium is less advanced in some areas because of how much was lost in over thousands years of cataclysmic warfare.

Isn't that the point of this trope or did I miss understand? Old Tech> New Tech for what ever reason.

[Artemas]

What we are saying is that quite a few of these examples are old tech is better than new tech, because the old tech is more advanced. Old tech> new tech means that old tech is better because it is old.

[Sarevok]

Yep. In a most apocalyptic scenario a weapon from before the Fall is obviously going to be far superior. The trope does not apply here.

[Shroom Man 777]

Ahuh, like how a modern day gun would be a superior weapon to the improvised flintlocks or the sharp sticks the survivors are going to use after World War 3, in the fallout-ravaged postapocalyptic remains of a wartorn world and stuff. It makes sense.

[Sarevok]

Yeah. In that context 40K has a perfectly sensible explanation. I am no 40Ker but was not mankind ridiculously advanced during the dark age of technology ?

[Shroom Man 777]

Or something. Doesn't stop 40k from being stupid (but tropes are stupider lol), so yeah.

[Sarevok]

Personally I think 40K is fine except for the unchanging status quo. I got some of the rule books and codexes because the artwork is amazing but cant bother to enjoy the actual storyline itself because nothing ever changes. Why bother reading tons of 40K novels when at end of the day the universe is exactly the same one you started with ? If the major factions lost, won or got plain completely destroyed the 40K universe would hold my attention lot more.

[Shroom Man 777]

Why do I care which major faction lost or won or got plainly destroyed? That has nothing to do in the 40k novels whose stories I enjoy, like Ciaphas Cain, for all I know the rest of that shitfluff can go to heck because I am far more interested in the personal stories of the likes of Ciaphas-kun and Amberly-chaaan! =^______^=

[Sarevok]

Yeah but don't you care if your favorite heroes actions ultimately have no effect whatsoever in the big picture ? Its kind of uninspiring to realize to know that nothing the hero does matters one bit.

[open_sketchbook]

That is however the status quo of real life; our expectations of one person, or a small group of people, causing radical change is baseless. Status Quo changed over time by trends and large groups, not heroes we can read interesting books about. When you multiply that up to the scale of 40k, you can see how billions upon billions are still too small a figure to ever cause any kind of meaningful change, nevermind one cowardly political officer.

[Shroom Man 777]

What? He saved the planet and the day, big whoop. Who cares if Ciaphas Cain will never help the Emperor finish his greatest big poops in the Golden Toilet, does it matter if the Emperor will be stuck there trying to clench out his constipations for the next ten billion grimdark futures? The big picture is a frickin' galaxy full of super-serious bullshit fluff anyway that's probably not even fun to read about, so what do I care if the rest of those lame stories of spess mareens and chaos and other shitty space morons never come to fruition?

I'll not let the terrible writing of Games Workshop fatties ruin my enjoyment of the works of non-shit authors like Sandy Mitchell and Dan Abnett and stuff.

[The Yosemite Bear]

Lets not forget King and Newman over in their Fantasy section, but yeah I've got a number of Abnett and Michell books too.

[lance]

Yeah. In that context 40K has a perfectly sensible explanation. I am no 40Ker but was not mankind ridiculously advanced during the dark age of technology ?

So 40k is less advanced now, and old tech is leet and kicks ass over the new crap. It doesn't apply to a trope about how old tech is leet and kicks the ass of the new crap, how exactly?

[Ryan Thunder]

Yeah. In that context 40K has a perfectly sensible explanation. I am no 40Ker but was not mankind ridiculously advanced during the dark age of technology ?

So 40k is less advanced now, and old tech is leet and kicks ass over the new crap. It doesn't apply to a trope about how old tech is leet and kicks the ass of the new crap, how exactly?

Because the "new" crap isn't actually new technology. It's old shit that's been rediscovered.

[Simon_Jester]

Yeah, but it's usually new stuff they can't build right, because something's missing. So they go "Fuck, we have no idea how they made this alloy. Whenever we try, it just melts its way out the bottom of the blast furnace. Let's use something we actually know how to make."

But since the alloy they know how to make is inferior... the product is inferior. Simple.

[lance]

Yeah. In that context 40K has a perfectly sensible explanation. I am no 40Ker but was not mankind ridiculously advanced during the dark age of technology ?

So 40k is less advanced now, and old tech is leet and kicks ass over the new crap. It doesn't apply to a trope about how old tech is leet and kicks the ass of the new crap, how exactly?

Because the "new" crap isn't actually new technology. It's old shit that's been rediscovered.

So old stuff is leet and the new stuff is crap. Your not exactly defending your point here.