I wonder which one is actually more convenient?

The thread image is weak against interception because it doesn’t fire beams while facing enemy aircraft.

If it’s this type, I think you have to grow beams on the side and slash while passing by, or the oscillator won’t break?

In the play, it doesn’t break, so it won’t break? Yeah

>>3

In the play, the Sloane Zwei’s Fang attacks in three different patterns.

– Normally firing a beam.

– Just extend the beam saber and stab with it, or the fang will explode.

(This is what happened to Howard and Lockon.)

A tactic to charge while keeping the beam saber in a “closed” state without “deploying” it, maintaining the appearance of “fangs” and then piercing through.

(This is when the Tieren’s torso was penetrated multiple times at its debut, and the Virtue’s field generator was penetrated and destroyed.)

>>17

By the way, Arke has primarily been used for shooting in three battles during the story.

Finally, when charging in and crushing the rifle bits, I’m just hitting them as they are.

I have never charged with my beam saber deployed.

The tactic of using drones for suicide attacks is functioning effectively, so it’s the latter.

Because there are neither beams nor lasers…

Let’s try making a drone that can fire actual bullets as a substitute.

>>6

The bullets are too small, so it would be better to just hit them directly.

I think the invisible scissor bit is the strongest.

Fang can do both…

Even within Gundam, it’s said that funnels are complicated to operate, and actually using them seems likely to hit allies. Besides, if there’s enough time to encircle and aim, it would be quicker and more certain to just charge in, so aren’t close-combat weapons stronger?

From the enemy’s perspective, being shot at from various angles by funnels is no different than the funnels themselves charging in from various angles.

There are types of drones that can shoot, so you can’t say much just about that.

The self-destruct type is not only heavily depleted.

It’s impossible for one person to operate multiple funnels in reality, and if they move automatically to some extent, it would be better for them to shoot at each other without a human being involved. Isn’t there a lack of practical use for that?

>>13

How about letting AI control it like Fang?

The type that shoots beams is still very strong even if you don’t have to bring the enemy close; just having it act like an option around your own ship as a semi-fixed turret is more than enough.

Perhaps it’s because we are in an era where the concept of AI control has emerged.

The Fang is quite refined as a bit weapon in the early part of the story, isn’t it?

The growth of AI technology is amazing, so we might be able to create something that works well even during a dogfight.

You don’t have to do everything alone like in Gundam, and if we’re talking about real situations, if the target is large or spread out, it’s better to load bombs and charge in; if it’s against infantry or civilians, I think it’s better to shoot bullets.

If it’s unmanned guided weapons, it seems like operating them from the rear, like current drones, will become the mainstream and evolve that way.

>>21

Isn’t it enough to operate the boarding aircraft with a drone?

>>74

Parent machine-type unmanned aerial vehicles already exist.

Lasers are practical countdowns.

If it’s a tank, it might be possible to have personnel on board to operate the drone.

>>24

I misunderstood the use of personnel in a kamikaze-like manner.

>>31

“Transam…”

The Fang of Gadara that dismantled the Jupiter probe Europa was watching, thinking, “Can it really slash through something so large compared to its blade?”

>>25

Gaderaza’s fangs charge forward, covering the entire fang with a beam, both large and small.

It feels more like a mass of beams crashing into you rather than being sliced.

Is there really a reason to charge in with the main body when you can shoot beams?

>>26

If countermeasures against beam weapons are increasing, then there’s no choice but to clash.

>>26

In terms of field tactics, physics is stronger…

>>26

In the case of Zwei’s fang mentioned above, it can pierce through Varché’s field.

Charging in without deploying the beam, breaking through the field and destroying the generator.

When it comes to Howard’s flag, I first launch it and then bring it back during the sword fight to stab with the beam blade, using it in a playful manner.

Because it’s been countered against beams.

I’m going to attach a powerful bomb to the Wappa.

Guided missiles seem to have more firepower than suicide drones, but there must be situations where drones are convenient.

>>35

There should be cost-effectiveness and such.

Missiles are expensive…

>>35

The names are just different, but the purpose doesn’t change, so the firepower depends on the warheads loaded.

Gadgelaza’s fangs are a bit too much.

Engineer: “If you’re an innovator, you can fully control everything in real-time, so keep at it!”

Well, it would be convenient if funnel-type weapons could shoot guns too.

In reality, I think it’s pretty much impossible for such a small weapon to have the speed to catch up with the enemy and the firepower to penetrate their defenses.

In the case of Fang, he charged in without a beam blade and pierced through the body of the particularly tough Tieren in one strike.

The speed and strength of its performance, which can still be used, is strange.

It’s not about either one in the end.

It becomes a discussion about how both have their appropriate places.

I hated Fang because he was ridiculously strong.

>>42

Responses from the world’s miscellaneous soldiers

If they’re made with the same technology, it’s a question of how much effort is being put into making MS that gets taken down by a small funnel.

>>43

In reality, drones are destroying tanks, so it’s somewhat inevitable.

>>43

I haven’t held back.

If they are made of the same material and have the same thickness, they will be destroyed by the same amount of heat.

It should all be fine with funnels, right?

Control can be left to Haro or a computer, just like what Cherudim is doing.

>>44

Well, in reality, Gadlara is somewhat based on that concept…

Isn’t it better to just use Fang for everything without using MS? Just have the battleship operate Fang directly.

>>49

That’s really true, and since it was a dead end, I exited…

>>53

Gadelaaza was rather a mobile weapon that fought aggressively at the forefront.

It’s not a concept where just the fangs are shown while the main body is kept back.

>>57

So it means there was a possibility that the niche for weapons like MS disappeared and only super fast and strong battleships and their escort, Fang, would be enough, right?

>>44

If all the military defense machines in that work turned into AI-controlled funnels or similar types.

I think it’s a pattern where the attacking side also prepares counter weapons, rendering them unusable with a large amount of shotguns or electromagnetic weapons.

In the end, a manual attack by a mobile suit equipped with a GN drive is stronger than this small capacitor output, right?

Even with a mob, we can form a dense formation to counter it, but it was Mihane’s after all.

The type of weapon that charges into the enemy and does a Trans-Am followed by a Kamikaze Attack is just too strong; I ended up having a different impression about it.

Someone who can take on such an incredibly dangerous weapon alone can be used as a portrayal of the most extreme danger.

When that crazy guy uses this, it’s extremely crazy.

I thought that a style with several gunners on board, like Gaderaza, would be fine, but being able to operate that amount by oneself is probably part of the concept, so it might not work.

>>52

In addition, in that case, there is also the restriction that the pilot is exclusively for Innovators.

I don’t know if it’s that they can’t demonstrate their performance unless they’re an innovator, or if they can’t withstand the Gs during combat.

>>56

In the case of Gadellaza, having six drive thrusters provides an enormous amount of thrust.

In the novel version, it is stated that an ordinary person would normally blackout.

We have to reduce the number of aircraft due to disarmament.

Since a new species called Innovators has emerged, we can conduct experiments, killing two birds with one stone.

Instead of just deploying funnels and attacking with an all-range attack, it’s stronger to coordinate the attack with allied units.

I think the situations where funnel weapons are effectively useful for one-on-one combat are quite limited.

I think that’s part of the reason why it declined after F91.

>>58

First of all, there are very few people with the ability to attack across all ranges who can leave their name in history, making it difficult for them to influence wars where numbers speak.

Gaderaza has an incredible level of firepower and mobility, capable of charging into a swarm of ELS without being eroded, given that physique…

It cannot be compared to a battleship.

The ELS can reach speeds comparable to the Trans-Am.

Gaderaza (the size of Tokyo Tower) is fast enough to play tag with those guys.

The funnel missiles are the best… is that right?

>>62

Hasa: “You shouldn’t rely on it too much, so it’s better to use it in combination with regular weapons, and it can probably also be used for intercepting! (Scattering the beam of the saber)”

A lot of snipers or a lot of suicide bombings.

It’s crazy for a drone to be flying around carrying a bomb.

It’s strong even when dropped, and it’s strong when charged straight in.

Once AI control starts to be acceptable, it becomes a trend to completely deny the idea of humans riding on robots in the first place.

>>67

Lord Treize was perceiving the truth meta-cognitively…

The strongest thing is for me to become a funnel myself.

>>70

I suppose it’s something like hypnosis…

Drones are too susceptible to jamming, so in the end, we ended up connecting them with fiber optics and they became like kites.

In other words, income is the strongest.