| |
On Tue, Aug 24, 2004 at 04:49:59PM +0000, David Rabadan wrote:
> Hello everyone. I was checking out
> <http://news.lugnet.com/space/?n=35752 Ryan Wood's Jade Empire Hong
> Hovertank post> and he mentions that we have seen little in ground
> combat vehicles other than <http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-
> bin/gallery.cgi?f=83811a power suit>. That got me thinking, when you
> have Power Suits available, should tanks be used / are they really
> needed? Can tanks add anything that power armor cannot?
>
> As a power armor fan myself I believe that they can replace tanks and
> do a better job than mechanized armor. They can carry a diversity of
> weapons; they are a bipedal weapons platform system. They can access
> areas that tanks may not. They can perform “surgical” strikes and with
> less collateral damage. What do you think?
I think tanks will still remain useful as siege weapons, spearheading
assaults, and general heavy battle. Power armor might be very useful for
surgical strikes, and urban warfare. But in an open field, or over long
distance, I think tanks will remain the weapons of choice.
Besides, tanks are inherently cooler :)
--
Dan Boger
dan@peeron.com
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Tanks or Power Armor
|
| Hello everyone. I was checking out (URL) Ryan Wood's Jade Empire Hong Hovertank post> and he mentions that we have seen little in ground combat vehicles other than (URL) power suit>. That got me thinking, when you have Power Suits available, should (...) (20 years ago, 24-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.geek, lugnet.build.mecha, lugnet.space, FTX)
|
50 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
