Re: Double-edged Mecha

Eli Arndt wrote:

> All this talk of Mecha has got me to thinking.  I accep the reality
of an 
> upright frame being more of a signiture, but shouldn't this work both

> ways. A higher profile also makes for a more advantageous firing 
> position against  armoured units.
> 
> As far as I know, armoured units are usually more thin-skined up top,

*Today's* armoured units are usually more thin-skinned up top. That's
because virtually all of them were designed before OTA munitions
started getting popular. There are countermeasures for those in the
works though (and not just Shtora/Arena-style systems), so I wouldn't
bet on AFVs being thin-headed in 30 years time.

> than 
> in the front or sides.  This is afterall, where the turrets and
engines 
> vents and such usually are.

If your mecha is very close to its target (within a couple hundred
meters, max - basically what DSII calls Close Assault range) and/or is
*extremely* tall, it might be able to hit the voonerables with
direct-fire weapons. If it isn't, the angle of impact will be much too
shallow to get any decent effect (and the target area will be much
smaller than the front/side at those shallow angles, too)..

The higher stature of a mecha would probably give it the ability to see
(and shoot) over tall obstacles (forests, small houses etc), but the
drawback is that it can also be seen and shot at from behind those same
obstacles :-/

> Now, I may be flawed in my logic, but it does seem fair.

Life isn't fair :-/

Oerjan Ohlson
oerjan.ohlson@telia.com

"Life is like a sewer.
  What you get out of it, depends on what you put into it."
- Hen3ry