RE: Infantry Walkers

John spake thusly upon matters weighty: 

> I've got to jump in here:  are you guys saying grav technology (not
yet
> available) is superior to walker technology (using some sort of
> electro-motivated fiber tech like in Battletech and some anime)  Both
of
> them are not available.

Well, even toss the Grav tech and insert ACV. But I think the GZG 
universe has quite clearly demonstrated the presence (and I think the 
quality) of its Grav equipment. 
 
> Why don't you guys argue who has the best baseball team in the year
2225 ;-)

Why, everyone knows, it's the Cubs.....
 
> Come on, everyone knows electro-motivated fibers are far more
efficient than
> grav engines, it's a known fact!

I think the point is, for whatever technology you decide to emplace 
in walkers for power plants, your tanks can harness the same power 
plant. If you have some sort of fusion or anti-matter plant (a 
requirement for energy weapons I'd guess), then they can both use 
that technology. But the walker needs complex motors, gyros, control 
filaments, etc. in order to accomodate its many times more complex 
range of motion (it does have to walk - no mean feat - and stay on 
its feet when firing, fired upon, and when experiencing rough terrain 
during transit). Whereas the tank doesn't have to perform such 
mechanically complex feats. And it doesn't have to donate power, 
weight, and space to the hardware to make this work. 

But if you like the idea of walking machines, and want to ignore the 
many ways they can be killed (more than tanks even!) and their 
potential engineering difficulties and associated cost factors, then 
by all means use them. 

Most of these discussion will boil down to "I like this" or "I don't 
like this" with some sugar coated reasoning to back up the prejudices 
of the people involved. It's a game - that's what its all about.....

Tom.