>>133048610 This intro already shows another blonde with huge tits in a pilot suit. So probably. I always wonder who the pilots of the objects the MC and his friend destroy are. Do we not see them because they aren't cute girls?
>>133048609 It is. I can't remember which volume number, it was either 4 or 6, but all the way up to it, they are being put up against things they simply shouldn't be able to beat, at all. At the end of said volume, they pretty much just get considered as a actual war asset, because they get dumped somewhere, where there is nothing for them to destroy, yet they still mange to somehow destroy shit
>>133048690 >And you can't tell me it can track an ICBM dropping in at supersonic speeds.
>>133048631 Both, the former being a bigger problem in head to head fights the second being worse for all this operating they're doing. She didn't even know what the weapon code was before she pulled it up and probably didn't realize there was even a second option.
Also why didn't they just have her switch to counter clockwise movement when they realized it could only go clockwise?
>>133048212 She's just being used as fodder by the Legitimacy Kingdom because her Baby Magnum is just a First-Gen Model, compared to the most of the objects in the current timeline which are Second-Gen Models. Second-Gen models are specialized objects for a specific terrain, having an immense advantage against an all-around object with no real weaknesses or strengths. She's bound to lose all the time, and that's where Quenser and Heivia come to play.
But eventually in the later volumes, she actually gets the job done, only except when her object gets destroyed early.
>>133049395 Do they ever explain why they had another obsolete Baby Magnum ready to go when hers was destroyed in Alaska? The book made it sound like luck that they happened to have one almost done, but why were they building it in the first place?
Also, do the elite pilots ever retire, or are they expected to keep going until they don't eject in time?
>>133050714 >why were they building it in the first place? It might make sense to equip a few secondary forces with gen1 machines so that they can be easily deployed in a variety of places.
Of course, this is nonsense. The long-range transport of an object would be prohibitively expensive, time-intensive and awkward in general. But that's probably handwaved along with so many other issues.
>This is a first gen object. It's inferior to specialized ones. >It doesn't need camouflage because nothing can hurt it anyway.
Sure, I can believe that they would be lax with personnel given how objects fight but the first arc is fucking retarded.
You saw how many maintenance staff they had for the Baby Magnum, even when it wasn't sortied. With the Water Strider in combat that day and about to return for maintenance, there should be at least 1-2 dozen staff wandering that fucking building. And a paper book labeled MAINTENANCE in big words with all that talk about confidential data?
And those two are just yammering at almost shouting voices to each other while running around the facility?
Not to mention, while Objects may be fast, there aren't that many of them. The idea that combined-arms would be abandoned immediately instead of switching over to specops missions against production and maintenance facilities is stupid.
Or just drop missiles on the facilities after they go out to sortie. They can't be everywhere.
Well, the HQ guys are trying to get them killed. See, the problem with them having destroyed something they really shouldn't have been able to is that now, other people are getting the idea they they too could take an Object down. And they are all failing horribly, but they are dragging battles on, and increasing casualties on both sides, since people are getting killed trying to sabotage the Objects, and people are getting killed protecting it. The high point is when they dump those two on an island with nothing to fight, and they SILL manage to blow something up.
>>133053953 Don't go into technical details. Otherwise you'd have to explain dozens of completely new technologies were put on hold and then later released in one great batch (objects) instead of updating the tanks and other weaponry that was currently being deployed.
>>133054306 Wrong. HQ wants them killed because war and building Objects is an industry. If word gets out that two guys can take out an Object (with optional backup from another), that could disrupt the industry.
>>133053588 That building was a storehouse for spare parts that get transported to the maintenance hangar when the parts are needed, not the actual maintenance hangar where the maintenance staff hangs around. The lazy chucklefucks didn't even bother guarding it because they were lazy chucklefucks who couldn't imagine someone with the knowledge to read an Object maintenance book would sneak into their base and be properly able to sabotage their Object by finding a part that was going to be used next time, then removing a tiny sensor from the incredibly complex machine in order to fool it into thinking an explosion from inside meant that there was damage worth self-destructing for. They were properly punished for their thinking that all other soldiers were lazy chucklefucks like them, and they never thought a person with technical knowledge of Objects would be an infiltrator, because that sort of person would not typically be a combatant (and Quenser is not an actual combatant).
>>133063967 >destroy the stations guarded by the Objects Good luck. Only way you can do that without dying horribly is to do it while the Object is out and occupied with fighting another Object, which is still a huge risk because either Object could win at any time, meaning your force still has the possibility get slaughtered. Not to mention that a forceful attack will be noticed and retaliated against. It's not the same as two or three people infiltrating where the limited number of people means that they can sneak past the defenses more easily. And if your infiltration team is caught before accomplishing its objective, you're fucked.
>>133063522 >I'm pretty sure they were being upgraded. I'm pretty sure that not, because otherwise the first objects would have been blasted to pieces. Offense has vastly outgrown defense. A defense that can withstand an all-out attack without so much as a scratch is a defense that is technologically simply on a completely different level. When you send tanks against modern infantry, those infantry may very well take your tanks apart with antitank rocket launchers. The narrative of the anime also makes it clear that it isn't just the thickness (size) of the object that makes it so impenetrable, but that it is structured very differently on a molecular level.
So, they were playing Civilization, except the team that got the head-start on science apparently decided to go with a weapon that shouldn't really work. Its design has some insane flaws, weight being one of them, and I'm pretty sure heat being another, and that's not even getting into tactical flaws like the exposed situation of the guns.
>>133064394 >exposed situation of the guns. This makes the least sense. We learned in WWII that one big gun beats multiple smaller guns in tank design. Big units are generally not worth it and everyone always tries to make them small enough while carrying big enough gun.
Heavy O would always be far more effective as single gun hidden in shell while around 50% smaller to avoid detection and hits and deployed in bigger numbers.
>>133051946 >I find this anime strangely amusing. >The girls and the mecha are completely irrelevant, this is a story of Qwenthur and Havia going on misadventures. >>133051984 >This. >I don't really care for the girls (besides Frolaytia when she's sexy) >I just want to see two bros giving hilarious commentaries in the middle of a battlefield.
And those are the reason this series is failing big time
Good lord, even the otaku can pick out how bullshit the girls are treated
>>133064647 >Ships only work in the water, they're ships. Ships outfitted with railguns can ruin more than just your coastal areas. >1st Generation Objects shouldn't work anywhere at all ftfy But anime physics, so whatever.
>Ships are also slow. Even when equipped with super special object power reactors?
>Good luck having a ship agile and big enough that it can dodge Object fire. >Good luck having something designed to move on water move more efficiently on water than a big fucking ball
>>133064692 >If you destroy the maintance base but fail to destory the Object, All you have to do is evade the object for a day or two before it shuts down. It's not easy, but it's certainly an option when you lack the firepower to oppose the object directly.
>And then the equipment is replaced From what base? Is the object fleeing the scene upon finding out you blew up its base?
>>133064788 An Object's reactor is REALLY damn big and heavy. You'd also need a fuckload of defense to protect it. By the time you've customized your ship to withstand the reactor AND the big-ass, super strong weapons it uses, it's already basically an Object.
>>133065119 I don't want the giant-ass guns from object which are also fucking retarded. I want some real guns, befitting of a platform that size. Give me a cannon capable of delivering intercontinental attacks through pure kinetic energy. At that point I don't need a presence outside of the water anymore.
You do understand that you are not fighting war to extermination, right? Object battles are glorified jousting matches.
You do understand that there are three other superpowers with military strength roughly equal to your own out there, right?
You do understand that if you break the "rules" on a scale where it actually matters (i.e. attacking a safe country), the other 3 superpowers will come and fuck you up without the rules protecting you either.
>>133065448 The point isn't to attack a safe country, it's to fix the problems with the design. The armor is basically useless because it doesn't protect the guns. If the guns need be exposed, then there is no point to protecting the main unit this heavily. Reducing armor would actually increase your overall efficiency because it would make you faster, more capable of outmaneuvering the enemy.
>>133065576 >fighting other objects is a risk of losing your object >objects usually come with many guns >make big enough gun on object to target the base (if not the object itself) >spill metal shards on the escape to clog magnetic drives of pursuing objects >if it still pursuing, bait it into explosives
Are you saying you'd use one of your own Objects guns to target the base and then flee after destroying it?
Because this is one of those things that sounds easier said than done when in combat with another Object. Especially seeing as you'd need a sustained bombardment to truly cripple the base.
I'd probably pressure you into moving away from the base zone too when I realized were you were aiming. It wouldn't take more than 10 minutes to force you dozens of km away.
Also I'm not entirely sure the metal shards idea would work considering the lasers would probably melt them. But I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt on that one that it would at least slow it down.
Have you pre-prepared these mines? Or have you set them up as you moved?
Because if its the former you'd potentially have to take a very wide detour to put me on your trapped path. If its the latter you'd be hard pressed to stop me noticing you spewing out powerful mines, especally after you've already pulled the same trick with metal.
People keep saying that but they said baby magnum was only like 50m tall. A WW2 battleship was over 4 times as long. Objects really aren't that big all things considered, you could easily fit it's reactor inside a nimitz, for example. So it being big is in no way a detraction from sticking it on a boat.
Give it a big railgun and simply snipe enemy objects before they get in range, as we have seen they seem to have abysmal range on those giant onions.
However my point wasn't to say they should put them on ships, my point was to discredit the whole "but the reactor's really big!" argument.
Also, as another anon said weapons technology is -ALWAYS- ahead of defensive technology, this has never not been true for thousands of years of history. Weapon systems like Objects would be destroyed by some ragheads in the middle east with shoulder-mounted "super penetrative high explosive rockets" or some shit. There's a reason real life militaries make things smaller, not bigger, because once it's too big it can be hit from anywhere at any time and destroyed.
Objects can't be handwaved in any way. Based off what we've seen/been told, they're too easily destroyed.
>>133067936 The reactor being really big means you can't go smaller. Go ahead and fit it on a battleship, but your battleship can still be sunk by smaller forces via shooting the shit out of it. The point of an Object is to be literally invulnerable to weaponry short of Object main cannons which are powered by that reactor. The big railgun idea could no doubt do damage to an Object, but the battleship is slow and not immune to everything of lower power than Object main cannons. And if you win one engagement, now all the secrets are out. An Object specialized in long-range combat is brought in and destroys the slow and (comparatively) squishy battleship. And don't forget that even if there were ragheads in the middle east with shoulder-mounted "super penetrative high explosive rockets," Objects don't solely rely on their onion armor. They have tons of lasers to intercept missiles and are fast and mobile enough to evade incoming attacks.
>>133067936 They have crappy range because Objects are capable of going from 0 to 300km/h in one direction, stopping, and then going in the exact opposite direction at comparable speeds in approximately 5 seconds flat.
Its fast enough to dodge mach 20 shots fired at it from less than 10km away. And this isn't theory. This is in practice.
You are right, the problem was never that the reactor is too big to fit on a ship.
You do realize that you're whole speech there is pretty meaningless, right? After all, they do have weapons capable of piercing an Objects defenses.
Unfortunately practicality restrictions means they are only viable when mounted on another Object.
Taking your ship from before - its possible to mount a railgun powerful enough to destroy an object on a ship.
But the Object is so fast that unless it was a surprise attack, it would never hit.
And hiding a several hundred metre long ship in the middle of the sea with dozens to hundreds of sattelites seems impractical at best.
>>133069618 >literally invulnerable to weaponry short of Object main cannons which are powered by that reactor. Which is essentially false because all you actually need to do is disable the cannons on top of it (and possibly its propulsion systems) to turn it into a harmless ball of stupidity. The armor is very selective, which is why the nuclear attack in the beginning was so outrageous in its inefficiency that only screams plot armor.
>>133069924 >The armor is very selective Explain what you mean here. The way the armor works is that, via bullshit done to get the setting to exist, it says "fuck you" to anything not concentrated and powerful enough to pierce through it.
Also, why are you trying so hard to argue about how unrealistic HO is? There's only like 50 people who like HO on this board, you're not going to change anything by calling it out on being unrealistic. I, as an example, accept that HO is unrealistic bullshit, yet I still find it amusing. Another example is >>133070349 who just doesn't care about physics. It's not like any claims to being a masterpiece are being made. HO is just an amusing thing that someone like me can enjoy. I enjoy seeing discussion, but you make me feel that you just hate the premise of HO, and that's little topic for discussion. Are you trying to convince HO fans of something or are you ranting?
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the content originated from them. If you need IP information for a Poster - you need to contact them. This website shows only archived content.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content you can contact me at email@example.com with that post and thread number and it will be removed as soon as possible.