|
Covok posted:Honestly, it might have been better if Zeon wasn't meant to be either Nazis or Imperial Japan. Once you tie something to a real historical group, you attach all the baggage that comes with that group. You can't ever really have Xeon be good because they're based on Nazis, for example, even though you could easily switch the narrative in any other circumstance because Zeon was an oppressed colony. You could do an interesting story there. But because they're meant to be Nazis or imperial Japan, you can't because then you're endorsing those horrible real life groups. Zeon/Side 3 is an oppressed colony. But all the colonies are oppressed, even the ones that didn't throw in with Zeon. Just because Zeon is bad doesn't automatically make the Federation good, which was the entire point of Zeta Gundam after the Federation created their own version of the Schutzstaffel with carte blanche to ignore any human rights just to keep the colonists from getting uppity. So uh, if you want an unambiguously sympathetic faction, there's always the AEUG, mostly made up of colonists that aligned with the Federation during the One Year War, only to get really disillusioned by their poor treatment after it. Zeon itself is interesting because for the most part the fascist imagery really only came in with the Zabi family. Zeon Zum Deikun was alternatively either a Space Jesus hippy in earlier depictions, or else just a nutjob with a messiah complex in later ones, but no matter the depiction he at least just wanted to get the colonies to get the gently caress away from Earth rather than rule over it and the rest of the human race as autocrats. Then he died under suspicious circumstances and Deikun's loyalists got purged except for literal superheroes like Ramba Ral 
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2018 19:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 19:54 |
|
|
Splicer posted:Remember that cyberpunk discussion where people were saying hacking a car was unrealistic? Welp, need to steal this for my Person of Interest-inspired RPG.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2018 19:26
|
|
|
Tricky posted:Sure, and that sounds great. In a vacuum. On the lower end, it requires a solid 25 (30, if you include the weapon itself) points to function in addition to a solid chunk of investment into energy. So you say that Powered Rifle and Experimental Reactor and Sniper Model is a high-end build? If you're looking at this one trick in isolation, it's 35 pts (40, with weapon). You can also definitely have good results with just one or the other, given the range on boost, which puts it as more both as being more scalable and with higher upside. Even without that, Powered Rifle is inherently more energy efficient than the Sniper setup since, at most, it'll only ever require 3 in and of itself. Like you said, you can even invest in the aim setup to make it better as you have more room in your build. Experimental Reactor also opens up the flexibility to bring in the other beam weapons which, largely, are really good. Because you're going to combine all of this together eventually. It's not like there's much better options compared to using EWAC/Commander Type/Assisted targeting. Put it this way - for 25 points (and 5 energy, to be fair), you get +4 Might. From a starting baseline of 4, buying 4 Might straight up would cost you...26 points. That makes it point-efficient, and the difference only increases if you raised your might to 5, 6 or 7 (which is fairly reasonable to do). So the Sniper Rifle is taking advantage of what is bar-none the most efficient way to increase your damage available to ranged weaponry - so the fact it requires it for peak performance isn't a downside, given you'd already want to grab it anyway. By contrast, grabbing Experimental Reactor and Sniper Model costs you 35 points, 10 points more than the Sniper Rifle's little gimmick did. This means that you're paying a significant premium for that energy efficiency, on top of being helpless against melee, and if you're looking for maximum damage that point-inefficiency turns Experimental Reactor and Sniper Model into luxury buys. What this means is that the Sniper Rifle gets rolling for less cost, with bigger range (and thus safety) than the Powered Rifle, and functions across all ranges - all of which combines to makes it a highly desirable option. Does that explain why it's good? Remember that at PL1, you usually have around 60 points to customize your mech once you've bought stats. Spending 30 points to get a weapon you can use for absolutely anything and everything while dealing tons of damage is a very good bargain overall.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2018 19:59
|
|
|
Transient People posted:Because you're going to combine all of this together eventually. It's not like there's much better options compared to using EWAC/Commander Type/Assisted targeting. Put it this way - for 25 points (and 5 energy, to be fair), you get +4 Might. From a starting baseline of 4, buying 4 Might straight up would cost you...26 points. That makes it point-efficient, and the difference only increases if you raised your might to 5, 6 or 7 (which is fairly reasonable to do). So the Sniper Rifle is taking advantage of what is bar-none the most efficient way to increase your damage available to ranged weaponry - so the fact it requires it for peak performance isn't a downside, given you'd already want to grab it anyway. By contrast, grabbing Experimental Reactor and Sniper Model costs you 35 points, 10 points more than the Sniper Rifle's little gimmick did. This means that you're paying a significant premium for that energy efficiency, on top of being helpless against melee, and if you're looking for maximum damage that point-inefficiency turns Experimental Reactor and Sniper Model into luxury buys. What this means is that the Sniper Rifle gets rolling for less cost, with bigger range (and thus safety) than the Powered Rifle, and functions across all ranges - all of which combines to makes it a highly desirable option. Does that explain why it's good? Remember that at PL1, you usually have around 60 points to customize your mech once you've bought stats. Spending 30 points to get a weapon you can use for absolutely anything and everything while dealing tons of damage is a very good bargain overall. Okay, and it's probably not a great idea to dedicate all your energy to your one gimmick. Unless you're dropping 28-36bp on energy alone, you're not going to have room for any ADs, overboosting, or anything else that might come up. Like, to be clear, I don't think that any of those weapons are competing for a top spot. Things like the Resonance Cannon (might as well use your Aim setup on that, instead, so you're more likely to blow up a layer of threshold), Boosted Lance, and other versatile beam weapons are much more tempting. You can, in fact, be a perfectly effective sniper by buying Powered Rifle, Experimental Reactor, and then whatever melee beam weapon strikes your fancy for those same 30pts. Magneburst, maybe, since that also serves to beef up your defenses. You end up with 2 guaranteed advantages from ER and boosting your beam weapon, plus the option for another if you end up hitting the melee trigger. And you have actual room in a 5 energy build! Now, of course, you could also just go ham with AoE and make "+4 damage" look like a bad joke. Because, hey, it really kind of is. If you're fighting a boss, you probably want techniques for big numbers or Beast for easy access to ignore ADs. If you're fighting mobs, you get more out of AoE with Expert Support. Also, fwiw, Sniper Rifle with that setup has equal range to a boosted Powered Rifle. They're both Long Range, but Powered Rifle gets an extra 5 on top for boosting to match the boost for aiming. I don't think I'm being crazy here when it's pretty clear that Sniper Rifle is not a great choice, comparatively, and that's not even getting into the real bad weapons. Bits? Fangs? There's all sorts of archetypes you might think are supported, but just... don't work. Tricky fucked around with this message at 20:28 on Aug 26, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2018 20:18
|
|
|
You mean the weapons that have a special power unique to them that lets them double tap for massive damage while an enemy is weak? That's uh, a take alright.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2018 20:39
|
|
|
Transient People posted:You mean the weapons that have a special power unique to them that lets them double tap for massive damage while an enemy is weak? That's uh, a take alright. You have read BGZ, right? Literally any category of weapon can take a rush power if they want to give up their next turn's action. Remotes get a special one, but it doesn't make them any better at it. Like, yes, hitting twice in a key round is good... and Twin Strike lets you use actual good weapons to do it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2018 20:41
|
|
|
Tricky posted:You have read BGZ, right? Literally any category of weapon can take a rush power if they want to give up their next turn's action. Remotes get a special one, but it doesn't make them any better at it. Like, yes, hitting twice in a key round is good... and Twin Strike lets you use actual good weapons to do it. Twin Strike requires taking two weapons which will only rarely work perfectly with each other (and, y'know, you're spending more points on extra weaponry too, that's a thing). Have you ever tried running a monoweapon setup? It makes the advantages of Go Funnels very obvious.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2018 20:46
|
|
|
Transient People posted:Twin Strike requires taking two weapons which will only rarely work perfectly with each other (and, y'know, you're spending more points on extra weaponry too, that's a thing). Have you ever tried running a monoweapon setup? It makes the advantages of Go Funnels very obvious. Sure, Ground Zero monoweapon is very strong at high PL. And, y'know, I feel like it's a little riskier to put your eggs in a basket that will pop on an incoming attack result of 6. Seriously. A might 0 enemy has a 50% chance of blowing up your only weapon. So, sure, you can invest in resupply to mitigate that, but that's a pretty disingenuous argument to make when you're harping on weapons requiring additional points. Tricky fucked around with this message at 21:01 on Aug 26, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2018 20:55
|
|
|
Tricky posted:Sure, Ground Zero monoweapon is very strong at high PL. And, y'know, I feel like it's a little riskier to put your eggs in a basket that will pop on an incoming attack result of 6. Seriously. A might 0 enemy has a 40% chance of blowing up your only weapon. So, sure, you can invest in resupply to mitigate that, but that's a pretty disingenuous argument to make when you're harping on weapons requiring additional points. ...At which point that enemy spent a round doing no damage to the pilots, thus giving them free shots at him. Like you do realize that if the enemy shot your remote you're baiting him into making a bad play, yeah? This is to say nothing of the fact remotes ignore terrain and control territory like absolutely nothing else - even in a 30 square battlefield it'd be impossible to hide from a Remote user, they can get around impassable terrain while not losing sight of other opponents, and so on and so forth. Its tactical advantages are prettttttty massive. Fake edit: Also, uh, you DO know defense is Guard + 5 right? So a might 0 unit can't pop your remote, it will take an actual attacker or very high tension to get it done in the first place.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2018 21:01
|
|
|
Okay, sure. I can see that this argument is going nowhere. I'm sorry that I impugned the honor of BCG, noted best mech game of all time, and I honestly hope you enjoy it while I explore better options.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2018 21:02
|
|
|
Actually, mechs are bad
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2018 21:18
|
|
|
Tricky posted:Okay, sure. I can see that this argument is going nowhere. I'm sorry that I impugned the honor of BCG, noted best mech game of all time, and I honestly hope you enjoy it while I explore better options. C'mon dude what's with this weak poo poo? Like whenever someone criticizes a system on this forum and someone who likes it contends the criticism it always end with the first poster doing this parting shot, no matter if it's Pathfinder, Exalted or Battle Century G.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2018 21:19
|
|
|
Plutonis posted:C'mon dude what's with this weak poo poo? Like whenever someone criticizes a system on this forum and someone who likes it contends the criticism it always end with this parting shot, no matter if it's Pathfinder, Exalted or Battle Century G. It's code for 'oh no I got owned by showing I didn't know what i was talking about, time to get huffy and exit the convo like being a big baby will let me keep my dignity' which, yeah, it's what happened here, minus dignity being kept
Transient People fucked around with this message at 21:29 on Aug 26, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2018 21:20
|
|
|
Tricky posted:Okay, sure. I can see that this argument is going nowhere. I'm sorry that I impugned the honor of BCG, noted best mech game of all time, and I honestly hope you enjoy it while I explore better options. Jesus Christ. I’m so loving bored. E; It’s guess it’s not really Tricky’s fault, we’re just really trained to see criticism as a good thing and why the gently caress are these nerds so sensitive when we’re just posting words, But also, Acting like the other person hosed our mother if they question said critique or calll out any inconsistencies, At the same time. Bedlamdan fucked around with this message at 21:58 on Aug 26, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2018 21:36
|
|
|
Transient People posted:Twin Strike requires taking two weapons which will only rarely work perfectly with each other (and, y'know, you're spending more points on extra weaponry too, that's a thing). Have you ever tried running a monoweapon setup? It makes the advantages of Go Funnels very obvious. Are there any mech games where each combat round you take multiple turns firing off your various weapons at different initiative passes? Because if not why the gently caress not.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2018 21:53
|
|
|
Splicer posted:Are there any mech games where each combat round you take multiple turns firing off your various weapons at different initiative passes? Because if not why the gently caress not. This is a good question, but personally I feel like this ecosystem then needs to also support Barbatos-style "You have advanced weapon systems, I have a large metal object I am going to swing through your mech at high speed" melee beasts. Ideally with some semblance of balance.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2018 22:14
|
|
|
Having played in a BCG game, it does have trap options. It's kind of one side of the seesaw between that and LANCER, which goes for a class-based focus where you don't have much in the way of options (and level 1 is rather lame as effectively a in-game tutorial). I would say BCG is a Good Enough Game that's cool with the sheer number of options you get, but it helps to have a GM that can steer players away from bad builds. At a certain degree of flexibility bad builds become inevitable and there's only so much to be done. I'd say the thing BCG needs most fixed is just a bump up for some weapons; there are some that are just better than others for what they do (or just for most builds) and there could definitely be rebalancing. However, the pool of good mech games isn't a deep one and it at least floats.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2018 22:21
|
|
|
Alien Rope Burn posted:Having played in a BCG game, it does have trap options. It's kind of one side of the seesaw between that and LANCER, which goes for a class-based focus where you don't have much in the way of options (and level 1 is rather lame as effectively a in-game tutorial). I would say BCG is a Good Enough Game that's cool with the sheer number of options you get, but it helps to have a GM that can steer players away from bad builds. Just to say, I've actually proposed ditching level 0 from Lancer before for precisely this reason but actual play feedback from multiple sources has been "actually level 0 helped me ease my group into the game as opposed to dropping not only talents and starting gear but choosing among 28 different licenses right from the start" so I guess it's doing some good. The flip side of this is it's fairly easy to just start at level 1+ which a number of other groups have done.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2018 22:37
|
|
|
Splicer posted:I know nothing about this game but I gotta say if I'm playing a mech "two weapons at once" is the bare minimum I would find acceptable. LANCER lets you use up to six weapons in a round now? which is down from, like, 20 a round in earlier dumb 'rip out all the systems and replace them with GUNS' builds.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2018 22:42
|
|
|
Leraika posted:LANCER lets you use up to six weapons in a round now? which is down from, like, 20 a round in earlier dumb 'rip out all the systems and replace them with GUNS' builds. Yeah but not at different initiative passes. To be honest the thought of subdividing each player's turn into multiple passes sounds kind of nightmarish to me, and I like involved tactical combat systems don't get me wrong, but that sounds like something that might be interesting in a video game but an absolute pacing-killer at the tabletop. Drones kind of used to work this way in that they were an end-of-round effect that occurred independent of actual turns, but they've since been reworked as simply another form of weaponry albeit one that targets a different form of defense.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2018 22:47
|
|
|
I know we're not talking about Gundam anymore, but I just saw Thunderbolts and the main character is the villain. Like, I know what I just said. That mother fucker is a sociopath who slaps women and insults the disabled and forces his tongue down the throat of a woman to shut her up. He's so despicable that there is no way we're not supposed to view him as the villain. I got like flashbacks to reading the Aeneid where Achilles was a douche and Hector was awesome.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 04:11
|
|
|
Covok posted:I know we're not talking about Gundam anymore, but I just saw Thunderbolts and the main character is the villain. Like, I know what I just said. That mother fucker is a sociopath who slaps women and insults the disabled and forces his tongue down the throat of a woman to shut her up. He's so despicable that there is no way we're not supposed to view him as the villain. The Living Dead themselves aren't too bad either, it's a story about people physically and psychologically destroyed by war, but I remember it making it pretty clear that Zeon were pretty terrible as a nation-state. The whole war, the massive loss of life, and the destruction they level that probably won't be topped until the Black History is all on them. They're fighting a battle in the ruins of a colony Zeon destroyed to make a point after all. The Federation is also bad in Thunderbolt, they send children to die with very little training in a scene reminiscent of All Quiet on the Western Front. It's mostly a story about soldiers in a war and in most wars, people do terrible things and everything turns to dark shades of grey. Io Flemming is a piece of poo poo though but I think the point was that the war and trauma of his home being obliterated made him into a monster. He was probably always a monster and has not redeemed himself so far but the war just drove it to a new level. I'm kind of hoping he gets blown up in the end.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 04:39
|
|
|
RocknRollaAyatollah posted:The Living Dead themselves aren't too bad either, it's a story about people physically and psychologically destroyed by war, but I remember it making it pretty clear that Zeon were pretty terrible as a nation-state. The whole war, the massive loss of life, and the destruction they level that probably won't be topped until the Black History is all on them. They're fighting a battle in the ruins of a colony Zeon destroyed to make a point after all. The Federation is also bad in Thunderbolt, they send children to die with very little training in a scene reminiscent of All Quiet on the Western Front. It's mostly a story about soldiers in a war and in most wars, people do terrible things and everything turns to dark shades of grey. If Flemming lives while Bernie died, there will be no justice.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 04:46
|
|
|
Covok posted:If Flemming lives while Bernie died, there will be no justice. I read that as Bernie Sanders, now picturing him in a Gundam series.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 05:04
|
|
|
Covok posted:I know we're not talking about Gundam anymore, but I just saw Thunderbolts and the main character is the villain. Like, I know what I just said. That mother fucker is a sociopath who slaps women and insults the disabled and forces his tongue down the throat of a woman to shut her up. He's so despicable that there is no way we're not supposed to view him as the villain. I think the point where you're supposed to realize Flemming is a really hosed up person is when he sneaks into an enemy cockpit, kills the pilot, and then goes on to taunt that pilot's friends over their communication network. In fact, if I'm remembering right that's the first time Io actually Does a Thing and wow does it let you know what you're in for with him. Also the part where he grabs an enemy combatant and uses him as a shield against sniper fire, that also left me pretty taken aback. Covok posted:If Flemming lives while Bernie died, there will be no justice. I mean, canonically, Bernie's life ends as a no name rookie, who died fighting to avert a nuclear strike that nobody knew had already been prevented. And I mean, even if Flemming does or doesn't die later on, he still survived the same war that Bernie died in. Not to mention people like Yazan Gable, who are every bit as hosed up as Flemming, live to a retirement and a ripe old age. So no, there is in fact, no justice. Though I'd be very surprised if Io doesn't eventually end up in the aforementioned Mecha-Schutzstaffel if he manages to not die. RocknRollaAyatollah posted:They're fighting a battle in the ruins of a colony Zeon destroyed to make a point after all. I think both Loum and Moore were inadvertent collateral damage between both factions, IIRC, because both Zeon and the Federation were happy to toss out WMDs like candy. That and Operation British is what convinced both sides to agree to the Alaska treaty, because otherwise mutually assured destruction was a goddamned guarantee. Then there was Char's Counterattack, where Char just sort of smiles and says "Mutually assured destruction is cool and good, actually"
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 05:53
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:Just to say, I've actually proposed ditching level 0 from Lancer before for precisely this reason but actual play feedback from multiple sources has been "actually level 0 helped me ease my group into the game as opposed to dropping not only talents and starting gear but choosing among 28 different licenses right from the start" so I guess it's doing some good. The flip side of this is it's fairly easy to just start at level 1+ which a number of other groups have done. It probably varies on the group based on how quickly they'd grab the system - it's probably better for a tabletop group than, say, an online game due to the differing pacing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 12:06
|
|
|
Alien Rope Burn posted:It probably varies on the group based on how quickly they'd grab the system - it's probably better for a tabletop group than, say, an online game due to the differing pacing. Yep, hit the nail on the head. People playing at the tabletop have praised the level 0 conceit for allowing them to dive right into the game, basically serving as the tutorial it's designed to be, while people playing online seem more comfortable taking the time to explore more advanced options. At the very least Tom's put some work into making the default Everest chassis less completely forgettable, giving it some actual abilities and GMS core bonuses to go with it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 12:23
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:Yep, hit the nail on the head. People playing at the tabletop have praised the level 0 conceit for allowing them to dive right into the game, basically serving as the tutorial it's designed to be, while people playing online seem more comfortable taking the time to explore more advanced options. At the very least Tom's put some work into making the default Everest chassis less completely forgettable, giving it some actual abilities and GMS core bonuses to go with it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 12:33
|
|
|
Splicer posted:Yeah, level 0 is a conceit I'm surprised most games don't have. Bunch of newbies? Start playing with stripped down characters to learn the game before you make major long-term decisions. All know what you're doing? Start at level 1. To be fair, the way some games do level 0 is terminally boring even for people learning a new system. 4E added some optional level 0 rules late in its lifecycle that I didn't think too much of at the time. Lancer's L0 play apparently serves its purpose but thankfully it seems like it's going to be getting better by way of adding a couple things to the baseline mech everyone gets access to and also tweaking gear costs and point values so a bit more customization even within the limited pool of starting gear is possible.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 12:38
|
|
|
Most of the time level 0 is ~the funnel~, where characters are made of wet paper and expected to die in droves to trash mobs during the level 0 adventure, with the survivors going on to be real PCs. This is why in e.g. Shadow of the Demon Lord, level 0 characters have basically no character options to pick from, because it would be counter-productive to go through full character creation for something that's going to die in one or two attacks. Lancer's level 0 stuff locks everyone to the same mech (which has completely average stats and toughness), but players still go through full character creation to pick their feat trees and mech loadout. It's there to save people who are making new characters from having to look through 120 pages of specialised mechs during character creation, because it already takes a couple of hours as-is. And yeah, it's significantly better now that the Everest has a Core Ability like all the other mechs. Lemon-Lime fucked around with this message at 12:55 on Aug 27, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 12:43
|
|
|
Ideally a tutorial/level 0 system will be something that allows both player and GM to begin play immediately and learn as they play over a session (or possibly two). It don't need to cover every single eventuality but it should provide a basic framework for the most common verbs you're expected to encounter in that specific game, be it Fighting, Sleuthing, Hacking, or whatever. I'd love to be able to have my friends over like with a board game night, give them (and myself) a thing, and just go without any more prep than that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 12:47
|
|
|
actually the "board game night" thing is a bad example because board games - aside from a very few specific examples like Fog of Love - have lovely/no tutorials and expect one person to learn the game and teach everyone else, and anyone who brings a new game to a board game night without first doing that learning labor should be savagely murdered
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 12:48
|
|
|
Countblanc posted:actually the "board game night" thing is a bad example because board games - aside from a very few specific examples like Fog of Love - have lovely/no tutorials and expect one person to learn the game and teach everyone else Please don't doxx me.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 12:51
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:Yeah but not at different initiative passes. To be honest the thought of subdividing each player's turn into multiple passes sounds kind of nightmarish to me, and I like involved tactical combat systems don't get me wrong, but that sounds like something that might be interesting in a video game but an absolute pacing-killer at the tabletop. Drones kind of used to work this way in that they were an end-of-round effect that occurred independent of actual turns, but they've since been reworked as simply another form of weaponry albeit one that targets a different form of defense. So in a mech game each round would be about 5 minutes. I have an ION CANNON on my mech's shoulder which takes time to charge, so it has a low initiative. My machine gun arm does less damage but has high initiative and gets to go again at half initiative. And on my other shoulder is an autotargeting light machine gun that gets no initiative of its own but shoots whenever I roll doubles. I suppose another way to look at it is everyone is playing a bunch of characters and all those characters are guns.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 12:56
|
|
|
I'm actually 50/50 on core unlocks being moved back to LL2 in 1.7 because on the one hand, it makes the Everest matter more because you use it for two levels instead of one, but on the other hand it's super disappointing to get your first level and spend your first licence point, only to be told "actually, you only unlock a new gun and some gear you probably don't want to use at this point, you don't get a new mech until next level." The way I'll probably solve it going forward is to jump PCs to pilot level 2 the first time they complete a mission, instead of 1. I also wish there was a talent tree that just gave you bonuses for sticking with the Everest instead of switching cores.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 12:57
|
|
|
Gundam sounds incredibly depressing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 13:14
|
|
|
Pollyanna posted:Gundam sounds incredibly depressing. It's literally the source of the 'wow cool robot!' meme after all. That and it's one of those sci-fi settings that has no alien life whatsoever (with the one exception that I think most fans don't regard much) so there's no guilt-free alien foes to exterminate, every war is between humans with thousands to millions of civilians who'd probably rather not be involved getting killed for the greed and vanity of the people in charge. Ghost Leviathan fucked around with this message at 13:33 on Aug 27, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 13:30
|
|
|
Is one of the Gundam series the source of the gif with the kid in a space suit getting their head blown off?
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 13:47
|
|
|
ManMythLegend posted:Is one of the Gundam series the source of the gif with the kid in a space suit getting their head blown off? Ideon. Same director as original Gundam--in fact, his immediately subsequent work. Legend has it that he pitched it as a super-safe super-toyetic series to make up for the initial flop that Gundam was then got that dark as a way of taking revenge against the execs/the viewers/the world at large.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 14:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 19:54 |
|
|
Mister Olympus posted:Ideon. Same director as original Gundam--in fact, his immediately subsequent work. Ok that explains why they look so similar in aesthetic. Thanks.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 14:20
|
|