Chaos025@aol.com
Sat, 18 Nov 2000 19:24:13 EST


In a message dated 11/18/00 4:29:02 PM US Mountain Standard Time,
edf91@worldnet.att.net writes:

> I thought Guncannon is for middle-long range
> support, while Guntank provide the long range
> support. Of course, Gundam filled the short-
> medium range support.

Okay, sure.

> If you count all these variant GMs, then why do
> we even having this conversation -- the original
> Gundam was built as a testbed for various
> equipment and technology that would eventually
> end up on the GM. GM was built with future add-
> on or modification in mind, so GM obvious can
> "adopt" to other environment, if you produce a
> variant for it or give it new equipment. I thought
> you are talking about whether a "regular" GM
> can do different things, more so than a Gundam...

I never said that GM's were better, or that they could do more. I only
questioned the idea that the original Gundam was a general-purpose unit and
that GM's are specialized units. My point was that the Gundam wasn't designed
to do a bit of everything, it was designed to be really good at one thing. On
the other hand, GM's are designed to a bit of everything, and are modified to
fill dedicated roles because of their inherent general-purpose nature.

> Then I am really confused here -- if a Gundam can
> do what a GM can do, then why are we argue that
> GM can do things a Gundam cannot do?

I'm not arguing about anything, only questioning someone else's statement by
pointing out my views of the show.

> How about effectiveness? I thought that the first
> GM produced perform much better at either space
> or land, but not both.

I feel that GM's are great at most roles they fill. I also feel that GM's
were designed to do what Gundam was designed to do, only cheaper and with
more adaptability.

> What I am talking about is that RX-79(G), along with
> GP01, GP01Fb, GP02A and GP03D, are designed
> to be used for a specific terrain (RX-79(G) and GP01
> is for land use, while GP01Fb is for space) or a
> specific function (GP02A for atomic, while GP03D
> for strategic point defense(?)).

I feel that a what is referred to as a "Gundam" is in fact the prototype of
the next generation in MS technology. The RX-78 series introduced the GM. The
Alex introduced the GM Custom. The GP series introduced technology used in
the MkII. The MkII introduced movable frame technology as well as the
technology gain from the GP series. The Zeta introduced transformation
technology as well as new weapons technology. The Nu introduced Beam shield
and Funnel technology. The F91 introduced the VSBR. The Victory paved the way
for all hero suits to be know as "Gundam" for all time there after.

> Yes and as a general rule of thumb, a Gundam,
> or any top of the line unit, would outperform most
> standard units at almost all terranes, except
> specialized units (sniper variants or marine use
> units), or when the Gundam is designed for a
> specific purpose (GP03D, and the RX-79(G)
> comes to mind).

See above.

> I am not sure if it's just me, but it seems I almost
> completely misunderstood what you're trying to
> say at first. Can you clarify a bit more? I am sure
> other peoples like more clarifications...

It does in fact look like you misunderstood my original post. I wasn't
arguing, nor was I trying to point out some obscure plot twist to the list. I
was only disagreeing and stating my point of view.

Which is: Gundams are not general-purpose Mobile Suits, GM's are.

SJ

EXO Mechanical Editor & Mecha Designer
http://www.exo-armor.com



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Sun Nov 19 2000 - 09:08:44 JST