Most efficient are the RX-0 beam sabres mounted on the forearms like a "beam tonfa", or the integrated beam sabres on the Aegis. Doesn't require hands and can activate at a moment's notice with no chance of slipping away. The Unicorn's forearm beam sabres are more flexible when it comes to usage as they can swivel on their mount to simulate swinging without needing to move the entire forearm, while the Aegis has fixed beam sabres that simply point outward from the limb.
Back placement stems from the RX-78's backpack mounting which was supposed to be vaguely based on samurai or ninja, but I don't think drawing a sword from the back would have been easy in real life unless it was fairly short.
>>13463826 >Non-standard manipulator Nope. Unicorn beam tonfa trumps it, and there's also Vagan MS that had multipurpose beam emitters in the palm of the hand that could produce beam pulses like a machine gun and a saber blade.
Why not just build a sphere with beam sabers pointing in every direction, we've already seen that beamsabers are effective at blocking or vaporising other beams and solid ammo, why not just have a porcipine ball of sabers and ram it into things. Better yet, if you cam bend the beam to just be a bubble around you, then bam, you've created the ultimate indestructible weapon.
having empty space in the arm where the saber should be stored isn't structurally sound and presumably works in Victory because construction techniques had advanced far enough for it not to be an issue.
Plus there's the fact the storage area needs to work as a place to charge the saber; it was backpack mounted on the RX-78-2 because that was the closest it could be to the reactors and still be conveniently located; it's easier to find space to put the required internals in the torso and legs than the arms.
>>13463855 nu had one on it's left arm, which is distinctly larger than the right (presumably both to act as a shield mount and to make room for whatever internals were required to get that thing charged and ready). It's backpack-mounted one was larger and more powerful though
Unicorn's beam tonfa is the worst of all arm saber storage. It's filmsy and it's too far away for the hand of the same arm to reach, which means it always have to grab the saber from the opposite arm. Sinanju/Sazabi 's saber rack is much better for the whole hands-free thing.
>>13463854 >Why not just build a sphere with beam sabers pointing in every direction As pointed out by >>13463895 we already have beam porcupine >turn bluish color >spiky >moves really fast Hey, it's mecha Sonic!
>>13463799 The storage spot on the back of the Gundam was where the beam saber was recharged. It was placed there for close proximity to the reactor. Putting it in the arm means having to have a conduit for minovsky plasma to travel through the shoulder joint and upper arm to the beam saber's dock in the forearm.
Now supposedly, according to the gunpla manuals, the Alex was the first MS to have these energy conduits so that beam sabers wouldn't run out of power again (happened to Amuro that one time) but it still happened to Judau in the latter part of ZZ and most other MS still docked their beam sabers on their backs. Maybe the arm conduits just extend the amount of time the saber can operate so it drains slower but still can't function constantly. Maybe the docking station on the back can charge it faster. Maybe the conduit through the arm requires a fuckton of insulation to keep the particles hot enough, who knows?
But as the other anons pointed out, having that hollow space for the saber not only weakens the arm but there's no real reason to make it a pop-out hand-held weapon when the same amount of space could be used to make it a built-it weapon.
>>13469084 Blame Bandai for making RD AGE-1 really ugly with weird proportion. It's as if they want it to fail so they have excuse to not making more of AGE RD after AGE-1 and Gafran (not that they have to do anything in retrospect) >>13469112 From what I remember, Judau was losing all the power in that Psyco Mk.II fight. Not just the saber, but thrusters as well. So the arm conduit won't help anyway.
>>13463810 Except it's not. Had it been the optimal way for humanoids to do blade combat there would have been more wrist blades in history. The reason for carrying a blade in your hand is because of the flexibility of the wrist allowing you to block and strike at more angles than wrist weapons do.
>>13469437 >a beam saber conduit on the palm >beam sabers on each fingertips >beam sabers generated from each knucklebones >beam saber on the forearm >beam saber from the inside of forearm >beam saber from the side of arm a la Cars/Chipp >beam saber from the elbows How far can you go
>>13470058 The beam sabers are pretty small, and the rifle is about as long as the Victory's arm. Whole different sizes. >>13470059 Yea, Usso just abuses the Victory's transformation articulation like a G1 Transformer.
>>13469491 Despite their similar shape, physical swords and beam blades don't share the same combat properties which, generally speaking, makes comparisons to traditional combat pointless in many areas.
For starters, a physical blade needs motion and momentum to cut whereas a beam weapon will pierce and melt on contact. Physical weapons also have to content with armor meant to block them; coincidentally, they need to be able to strike weak points in the armor to do any real damage. Because of that, physical blades need the range of motion provided by the wrists to land appropriate blows - a non-issue with beam and plasma weapons.
Now, the natural response to all of this would be the need for flexibility as a way to avoid projecting all of your movements in a melee duel... the problem is that humans are very limited in their ability to move through space. We can't jump very high, we don't duck too low, etc. Mobile suits, on the other hand, have thrusters that allow them far greater range of movement within 3D space at a much faster speed. The nuance in mobile-suit to mobile-suit melee combat isn't in how you handle the blade so much as its how you handle the body.
This isn't to say that a more articulate suit like, say, the (s)Exia wouldn't dominate other suits in physical combat, just making the point that manipulator articulation isn't as important in an MS context as it is in the human one.
>>13470122 As you put it, momentum isn't important when using beam weapons. That, however, doesn't make flexibility and joints useless, it arguably makes more joints even more practical. If all else is equal (thruster configuration and output, size, weight, armor and saber number and length) the suit that has a greater flexibility to create strikes as well as block them will be superior. It's really not much to discuss.
>>13463866 See, this is why the villian's gundam design is so genius. It looks strong without looking bolated. It looks humanoid, but that claw takes away from it's humanity. Colours could have been better chosen, but it's still an amazing machine. Much better design than Turn A
>>13470313 you must be a complete idiot, those designs were leagues ahead of pretty much every grunt suit in gundam, i mean the series was shit and they were never used properly but my god just think for a second: 1Dual variable mount beam emitters in the palm for a quick change from beam machine gun to sword/2 guns /2 swords 2chest mounted cqc beam spray emitter with varying focus of spray 3Tail mounted heavy beam cannon for anti battleship and anti ms operations
You sir a retard for even thinking they need to hold any weapon they don't already have. If this was a zaku it would be 3 or 4 custom individual suits with applied upgrades and maintenance. ALSO IT COULD FUCKING FLY BY DEFAULT
>>13470210 Innovade's questionable gender aside, the first one who used Garazzo is Bring Stabbity (or his twin, I forgot), a male type. So it's not like Garazzo is Hilling's specially designed unit y'know. Gadessa already used by Revive so it's logical for Hilling to use other unit in that final battle. Just be glad they don't paint the Garazzo pink.
What would you guys think of a Gundam series or story where mobile suit beam weapons have to be attached to backpack generators for power, because they don't have something like e-cap or e-pac technology?
>>13474076 In most series including the original, they're already powered by the reactor.
Still, it should be noted that e-caps and e-pacs merely reduce the amount of electricity required, because they store particles in a high energy state. There will always need to be a reactor to power the beam weapon.
>>13474085 I mean like attached with cables and stuff while in battle. It's just a visual I have in my head, of mobile suits fighting with cabled beam weapons and it being a limitation of the technology because they're the first generation of combat MS.
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.