 | | Re: Designation conflict
|
| (...) ...Ive always thought of the word assault as a charge or initial attack, so by that term, an assault mecha would be fairly fast, preferably lightly armed in preference to heavily armoured with the idea being to get to the enemy intact as fast (...) (25 years ago, 27-Mar-00, to lugnet.build.mecha)
| | | | | Re: Designation conflict
|
| (...) That would be more of a fast attack/light assault mecha. Assault Mecha would have heavier armor, more powerfun weapons, and a slower rate of fire, thereby moving slower. Macross/Robotech Valkyries would probably fall into the light assault (...) (25 years ago, 27-Mar-00, to lugnet.build.mecha)
| | | | | Re: Designation conflict
|
| <SOAPBOX>Generally (as I understand it at least), an assault is a direct confrontation, usually from the front. With a prepared defender, losses to the attacking forces can be frighteningly high. With this in mind, the light, fast mecha doesn't seem (...) (25 years ago, 27-Mar-00, to lugnet.build.mecha)
| | | | | Re: Designation conflict
|
| (...) ...A light assault unit's primary goal is not to exploit or create a breach, but to engage the enemy and keep them distracted while heavier units can roll up. Even with light weapons, a small mecha cant just be ignored when its close, so has (...) (25 years ago, 27-Mar-00, to lugnet.build.mecha)
| | | | | Re: Designation conflict
|
| "Stephen F Roberts" <wubwub@wildlink.com> wrote in message news:6hivdssdkbvjj3r...4ax.com... (...) to (...) most (...) If you are attacking along the same front, where's the distraction? The defender's will be able to see the heavies coming. (...) (25 years ago, 27-Mar-00, to lugnet.build.mecha)
| | | | | Re: Designation conflict
|
| (...) ...In this discussion, I suppose the term 'assault' should not be used to assume a full frontal assault (which, like in WWI, was a general stupid thing to do), but instead refer to an assault along the best front possible given the conditions. (...) (25 years ago, 28-Mar-00, to lugnet.build.mecha)
| | | | | Re: Designation conflict
|
| I think we could debate this for a *long* time and not change each other's minds. I will say however, that I can see where you are coming from, Stephen, even if I don't agree. 8) Heh, as for the banner, I'll get right on it. 8) Ben -- Ben Vaughan (...) (25 years ago, 29-Mar-00, to lugnet.build.mecha)
| | | | | Re: Designation conflict
|
| (...) ...But its fun! :-) (...) ...cool! :-) ...you can go back to ignoring me now... wubwub stephen f roberts wamalug guy ((URL) #160 (25 years ago, 29-Mar-00, to lugnet.build.mecha)
| |
