Subject:
|
Re: Designation conflict
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.build.mecha
|
Date:
|
Wed, 22 Mar 2000 15:56:09 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
3909 times
|
| |
|
|
I see what you mean. I'm clueless now as well.
On Tue, 21 Mar 2000 20:54:14 GMT, Travis Dickinson <travis@pdn.net>
wrote:
> True, Battletech uses the assault classification. However, to me, assault
> implies something that is bulky, relatively slow, and generally loaded with
> weapons.
>
> Look at the Stormbringer on my site to see what prompted my question about
> sizes.
>
> Travis Dickinson
> http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Jupiter/7021
>
> Jorge Rodriguez wrote:
> >
> > aren't they called assault mechs? Isn't that the name battletech gives
> > to really huge mecha?
> >
> > On Fri, 17 Mar 2000 16:57:16 GMT, Travis Dickinson <travis@pdn.net>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > What's the designation for a mecha that is going to be twice the height of a
> > > heavy mecha? Should the previous mecha be down graded in class?
> > >
> > > Travis Dickinson
> >
> > Jorge Rodríguez
> > rodriguez.136@osu.edu
Jorge Rodríguez
rodriguez.136@osu.edu
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Designation conflict
|
| True, Battletech uses the assault classification. However, to me, assault implies something that is bulky, relatively slow, and generally loaded with weapons. Look at the Stormbringer on my site to see what prompted my question about sizes. (...) (27 years ago, 21-Mar-00, to lugnet.build.mecha)
|
16 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
