Re: Helltank and Helltank Destroyer

Or you could postulate something like the rationalization (admittedly, a
little weak) that is usually used for Star Wars AT-ATs and the like. 
The aggressor/invader force may be sufficiently more advanced than the
defenders (in production/GNP terms) that for them the extra cost is
negligible compared to the psychological impact of a super-tank.

You've got to admit, they're pretty scarey-looking.

George,Eugene M wrote:
> 
> You gotta love the enormous freak-tank for its own sake though. Even 
if it stinks in real-life. Anyhow most Freak-Tank/'Mecha games always
have postulated some kind of hothouse type of environment where the
Giant Robot/Ogre/Heavy Launch Tank/Bolo thriv
es due to Biphase Carbide Armor/Lack of Artillery or its ineffectual
nature/PSB/It Looks Cool. Hell, maybe the environment is like (shudder)
Epic scale Squats, where
the environment on the planets they live is so harsh they live in giant
armored Winnebagos/Mining Machines/Tanks/Land Trains/Crawlers/Hoo Hahs. 

> Or combat is so ritualized it takes place only with Battlemechs
a'lathe  Tournaments of High-Medieval Europe, using outmoded, heavy
armors that would be rattling deathtraps on the 'real' battlefield
(winched into the saddle, indeed). Maybe 'Mecha/Freak-
Tanks are 'fashionable' weapons or prestige weapons (every Banana
Republic want's a cybertank...). So there are tons of SF niches that are
apropos for the freak-tank. All rationalizations aside, IIRC Helltank
had a more reasonable side to the background, 
too......
> 

1