Mon, 13 Nov 2000 16:25:35 EST

In a message dated 11/13/00 1:26:12 PM US Mountain Standard Time, writes:

> Why do you think I put quotation mark around the
> word scare? I just mean that the weapon is mainly
> use to cover the field with shots so ships and MS
> won't just go straight into the fleets. Do cover fire
> cause damages? Of course it does. Do they hit
> the target often? Probably not.

And again, that would a waste of time, money, material, and manpower. Before
MSs, ships slugged it out between themselves while swatting fighters out of
their way. When MSs were introduced, ships then had to deal with each other,
fighters, and now a super fighter that was even more deadly to them than
standard fighters. So, the side that didn't have the super fighter decided to
build their own, and they gave these super fighters ship class weapons.

Now, last I heard, the beam rifle was the first now ship mounted beam weapon,
and was of the same class and capability as standard ship class mega beam
weapons. The only limitation being a limit to the number of shots the beam
rifle could carry with it.

This is equivalent to mounting Shipkiller missiles on today's fighter planes.
Are the ships any less dangerous? No, the fighters are now more dangerous to
ships than they were before. And what do we use to counter these fighters?
Other fighters, of course. And are the ship now any less dangerous? No, but
carriers are now a very important element in a successful navy, even more so
than the still deadly warships.

So, what good are warships when fighters and their carriers are the supreme
weapons of war? Simple, there is no practical counter to a shell weighing in
as much as a Volkswagen hitting you from 12 miles away.

So, the move in Gundam to mounting even more mega beam cannon on ships than
before as MS combat becomes such focus is most likely a reinforcement of the
role these ships have always played. The role of Dreadnought.

> Read above. Did you even follow the thread where
> we have been discussing the role of warships? I
> certainly have been saying that weapons on warship
> are used mostly for cover fire than actually aiming
> and trying to destroy a target.

Yes, indeed, I have been following it. Both of you should a lack in knowledge
about the use of warship in a battle. I'm no expert, but I do have an
educated opinion on this subject.

> I just find it confusing that someone who hadn't
> "participate" in the thread suddenly want to jump
> in and start to discuss the "details" of something,
> when that "detail" is already discuss or covered in
> the previous posts.

If this was a "private" thread, then way is on the mailing list in the first
place? If you did want someone jumping in and expressing their opinion, then
you two should have moved this discussion off this list. But since you
didn't, this thread is on topic, and I'm a member with voice I feel should
heard, I have decide to point out a few "details" that seem to be assumed but
not wholly true.

> PS. Can you try NOT to use html style of messaging?
> It's kinda hard for people to add their replies and make
> it easier to read when they had very little experience
> with html style of messaging. I am sure over 80 to 90%
> of the post on the list are just regular texts, so it would
> be really helpful for some of us here who don't want to
> screw around with the options just so a few people here
> want to use html style of e-mails. Just my opinion, of
> course...

I do apologize for that. I just made some software changes, and I haven't
figure out how to shut off the html crap that keeps popping up. Of course, I
seem to be able to edit your post fine, even with the html ... maybe it's
just you?

Any way, if you don't want me or anyone else to state an opinion, then don't
both replying, just move this thread off list. Just my opinion, of course...


EXO Mechanical Editor & Mecha Designer

Gundam Mailing List Archives are available at

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Tue Nov 14 2000 - 06:10:40 JST