silverback

[Zer0 Kay]

Would it have been better if the two models were written up as one with an uparmored add on?

[Arnie100]

True. It does make you go "Huh?" Kinda like the M1 Abrams TUSK conversion?
http://www.army-guide.com/eng/product4072.html or the Up-Armored Humvee?
http://www.militaryfactory.com/armor/de ... mor_id=115

[Lt Gargoyle]

I see them as an upgradeable package deal. there maybe a few minor differences but overall they are all the same.

[Kagashi]

Yeah, it would have been easier to just have a listing of modular accessories as opposed to different models. But I honestly overlook the Silverback anyway. It got so little play in Prelude and none in the movie...its hard to associate with it and it really does not stand out as a significant mecha stat wise.

[ShadowLogan]

I treat it as three (3) different models: normal (-9L), heavy (-9H), recon (-9E).

It doesn't appear to use the "package" system like the Cyclones for a letter designation, since you have 5 configurable hardpoints (plus option for 2 more). That suggests that the letter assignment on the VM-9 is just like the Alpha, Beta, and other mecha indicating a new model and not simply an add-on feature.

[Chronicler]

Yeah, it would have been easier to just have a listing of modular accessories as opposed to different models. But I honestly overlook the Silverback anyway. It got so little play in Prelude and none in the movie...its hard to associate with it and it really does not stand out as a significant mecha stat wise.

I find the Silverback useful as a support asset, nothing more, nothing less. Plus I guess it be good if you can't get Alphas in there area without drawing attention to you.

[Zer0 Kay]

Yeah, it would have been easier to just have a listing of modular accessories as opposed to different models. But I honestly overlook the Silverback anyway. It got so little play in Prelude and none in the movie...its hard to associate with it and it really does not stand out as a significant mecha stat wise.

I find the Silverback useful as a support asset, nothing more, nothing less. Plus I guess it be good if you can't get Alphas in there area without drawing attention to you.

So... Your opinion on modular units? Should they be a write up or writ UPS?

[drewkitty ~..~]

after a quit scan of the SC book..

the -9L base vehicle is fundamentally different from the -9H and -9E. And the text of the -9E basically says it is the -9H with different augmentation modules.

So No and Yes.
-------
The OP question was not well written and left out the contextual text.

[Tiree]

after a quit scan of the SC book..

the -9L base vehicle is fundamentally different from the -9H and -9E. And the text of the -9E basically says it is the -9H with different augmentation modules.

So No and Yes.
-------
The OP question was not well written and left out the contextual text.

The question should really be: Should they have consolidated the Silverback into one Entry, or did they really need to make it 3. The same can be said for the variations on the Cyclones, Alpha's, and anything else that has multiple models and entries.

[Chronicler]

Yeah, it would have been easier to just have a listing of modular accessories as opposed to different models. But I honestly overlook the Silverback anyway. It got so little play in Prelude and none in the movie...its hard to associate with it and it really does not stand out as a significant mecha stat wise.

I find the Silverback useful as a support asset, nothing more, nothing less. Plus I guess it be good if you can't get Alphas in there area without drawing attention to you.

So... Your opinion on modular units? Should they be a write up or writ UPS?

Yes and no. There are as drewkitty stated there are differences between the 9L and 9H however the 9E could have been a modular package. As for being separate entries I would point to how they did the cyclones which would make some sense, plus I would like to see more variety for modeler packages to give the Silverback more roles. Double points for having a gunpod besides a rail-gun or heavy infantry weapons.

[Kagashi]

Yeah, it would have been easier to just have a listing of modular accessories as opposed to different models. But I honestly overlook the Silverback anyway. It got so little play in Prelude and none in the movie...its hard to associate with it and it really does not stand out as a significant mecha stat wise.

I find the Silverback useful as a support asset, nothing more, nothing less. Plus I guess it be good if you can't get Alphas in there area without drawing attention to you.

So... Your opinion on modular units? Should they be a write up or writ UPS?

Yes and no. There are as drewkitty stated there are differences between the 9L and 9H however the 9E could have been a modular package. As for being separate entries I would point to how they did the cyclones which would make some sense, plus I would like to see more variety for modeler packages to give the Silverback more roles. Double points for having a gunpod besides a rail-gun or heavy infantry weapons.

but negitive points for having those gun pods magically adjust in size depending on if it is a human wielding it or the Silverback wielding it.

[Lt Gargoyle]

Yeah, it would have been easier to just have a listing of modular accessories as opposed to different models. But I honestly overlook the Silverback anyway. It got so little play in Prelude and none in the movie...its hard to associate with it and it really does not stand out as a significant mecha stat wise.

I find the Silverback useful as a support asset, nothing more, nothing less. Plus I guess it be good if you can't get Alphas in there area without drawing attention to you.

So... Your opinion on modular units? Should they be a write up or writ UPS?

Yes and no. There are as drewkitty stated there are differences between the 9L and 9H however the 9E could have been a modular package. As for being separate entries I would point to how they did the cyclones which would make some sense, plus I would like to see more variety for modeler packages to give the Silverback more roles. Double points for having a gunpod besides a rail-gun or heavy infantry weapons.

but negitive points for having those gun pods magically adjust in size depending on if it is a human wielding it or the Silverback wielding it.

Yea love that robotech magic re-sizing spell.

[Kagashi]

but negitive points for having those gun pods magically adjust in size depending on if it is a human wielding it or the Silverback wielding it.

Yea love that robotech magic re-sizing spell.

I think we just found a use for the Negate Magic spell for the energy wizards.

[ShadowLogan]

Yes and no. There are as drewkitty stated there are differences between the 9L and 9H however the 9E could have been a modular package.

The -9E is fundamentally the same as the -9H, but the -9E could also have seen installation of wiring and other things to optimize it for its role meaning the -9E systems are not just a modular package. The -9E doesn't have the MM-12 found on the -9H, which might be built in for the model for ex.

[Zer0 Kay]

Yeah, it would have been easier to just have a listing of modular accessories as opposed to different models. But I honestly overlook the Silverback anyway. It got so little play in Prelude and none in the movie...its hard to associate with it and it really does not stand out as a significant mecha stat wise.

I find the Silverback useful as a support asset, nothing more, nothing less. Plus I guess it be good if you can't get Alphas in there area without drawing attention to you.

So... Your opinion on modular units? Should they be a write up or writ UPS?

Yes and no. There are as drewkitty stated there are differences between the 9L and 9H however the 9E could have been a modular package. As for being separate entries I would point to how they did the cyclones which would make some sense, plus I would like to see more variety for modeler packages to give the Silverback more roles. Double points for having a gunpod besides a rail-gun or heavy infantry weapons.

Okay the difference between the l and the h grapically, not PBs made up stats is are putting on the front cover and side doors. Making it a different unit is less like calling an up armored HMMWV a completely different vehicle from the standard HMMWV and more like saying putting the windows doors and canopy on a M151makes it a different vehicle or removing the canopy, doors and tailgate on an HMMWV make it a different vehicle. The 9E should just be a modular change out for the turret just like the Modula change outs for the wheel hubs.

No comparison to the cyclones where besides the transformation the bodies are different between the 30s and the rest, the cowling and sensors are different on the 40s, assuming the sabers should be easily removed and put onto the gauntlets of any except the 30s, the 50s should be the most modular and in arms selection they are but the 58 shouldn't even be a 50 since it isn't as modular and the gr-97 on it isn't even the same as the one available on the 52. Most of the stuff I can dismiss as the variant on the silverback and the 52 are just suffixes like the C-130j where the units are the same but have an upgrade that wasn't originally in the design. In that case the engineers of RT in the case of the Silverback L and H are just stupid. The other issue with their numbering scheme is that the original shouldn't have a letter. I mean what is the difference between the 9 and the 9L? The roll bars? Maybe having tires.

[Zer0 Kay]

Yes and no. There are as drewkitty stated there are differences between the 9L and 9H however the 9E could have been a modular package.

The -9E is fundamentally the same as the -9H, but the -9E could also have seen installation of wiring and other things to optimize it for its role meaning the -9E systems are not just a modular package. The -9E doesn't have the MM-12 found on the -9H, which might be built in for the model for ex.

New wiring hardly constitutes a new designator. There were only two models of the SR-71and that had to undergo an entire wiring overhaul because the wire insulator would burn and smoke up the cockpit after mach 3 flight. Their was no change in the F-16's designator after General Dynamics fixed the wire harness issue that was turning the plane into a lawn dart.

That said the radar probably all required a new control system installation and much more than just wiring so I can see the designator as being justified, unless it was part of the original design, in which case a smart engineer would have designed it to be modular.

[drewkitty ~..~]

Should they be a write up or writ UPS?

Write-ups

[ShadowLogan]

Yes and no. There are as drewkitty stated there are differences between the 9L and 9H however the 9E could have been a modular package.

The -9E is fundamentally the same as the -9H, but the -9E could also have seen installation of wiring and other things to optimize it for its role meaning the -9E systems are not just a modular package. The -9E doesn't have the MM-12 found on the -9H, which might be built in for the model for ex.

New wiring hardly constitutes a new designator. There were only two models of the SR-71and that had to undergo an entire wiring overhaul because the wire insulator would burn and smoke up the cockpit after mach 3 flight. Their was no change in the F-16's designator after General Dynamics fixed the wire harness issue that was turning the plane into a lawn dart.

That said the radar probably all required a new control system installation and much more than just wiring so I can see the designator as being justified, unless it was part of the original design, in which case a smart engineer would have designed it to be modular.

No if it was just simple wiring I would tend to agree with you (at best it might end up as a block upgrade, which is not something the RPG/HG considers), but:
-the MM-12 system has been removed, which comes across as a non-modular package in the -9H since the -9L can not use it (nothing is mentioned)
-it reads like the turret is "fixed" to the one package, so the turret on the -9E might have a series of extensive changes to the turret and/or to accommodate the sensor package, so it doesn't appear to be one of those drive into shop and its a simple swap out like the standard packages the -9H and -9L share.

[Zer0 Kay]

Yes and no. There are as drewkitty stated there are differences between the 9L and 9H however the 9E could have been a modular package.

The -9E is fundamentally the same as the -9H, but the -9E could also have seen installation of wiring and other things to optimize it for its role meaning the -9E systems are not just a modular package. The -9E doesn't have the MM-12 found on the -9H, which might be built in for the model for ex.

New wiring hardly constitutes a new designator. There were only two models of the SR-71and that had to undergo an entire wiring overhaul because the wire insulator would burn and smoke up the cockpit after mach 3 flight. Their was no change in the F-16's designator after General Dynamics fixed the wire harness issue that was turning the plane into a lawn dart.

That said the radar probably all required a new control system installation and much more than just wiring so I can see the designator as being justified, unless it was part of the original design, in which case a smart engineer would have designed it to be modular.

No if it was just simple wiring I would tend to agree with you (at best it might end up as a block upgrade, which is not something the RPG/HG considers), but:
-the MM-12 system has been removed, which comes across as a non-modular package in the -9H since the -9L can not use it (nothing is mentioned)
-it reads like the turret is "fixed" to the one package, so the turret on the -9E might have a series of extensive changes to the turret and/or to accommodate the sensor package, so it doesn't appear to be one of those drive into shop and its a simple swap out like the standard packages the -9H and -9L share.

Sure for the game, but if it existed in real life all of the radar systems would have to be in the turret with only the power and data lines going into the silverback. Power and data lines which would already be present for the railguns (power and targeting/elevation and azimuth error. So IRL a turret using a remotely controlled and powered weapon would already be wired. As for the MM-12 they just look like an alternate side mount option. Do you want packs full of mini missiles or a mini missile pack?

[ShadowLogan]

Sure for the game, but if it existed in real life all of the radar systems would have to be in the turret with only the power and data lines going into the silverback. Power and data lines which would already be present for the railguns (power and targeting/elevation and azimuth error. So IRL a turret using a remotely controlled and powered weapon would already be wired. As for the MM-12 they just look like an alternate side mount option. Do you want packs full of mini missiles or a mini missile pack?

We also have to remember that new variants can appear due to a focused role. The -9E has a completely different focus than the -9H. So I can see it being a different model.

The MM-12 might be an alternate option, but it is not an option the VM-9L/E can exploit as written. If it was a purely modular system, the VM-9L/E should be able to use it. That suggests the MM-12 is either built-in to the -9H or has hardware built-in to the -9H that is not present on the -9L/E.

[Zer0 Kay]

Sure for the game, but if it existed in real life all of the radar systems would have to be in the turret with only the power and data lines going into the silverback. Power and data lines which would already be present for the railguns (power and targeting/elevation and azimuth error. So IRL a turret using a remotely controlled and powered weapon would already be wired. As for the MM-12 they just look like an alternate side mount option. Do you want packs full of mini missiles or a mini missile pack?

We also have to remember that new variants can appear due to a focused role. The -9E has a completely different focus than the -9H. So I can see it being a different model.

The MM-12 might be an alternate option, but it is not an option the VM-9L/E can exploit as written. If it was a purely modular system, the VM-9L/E should be able to use it. That suggests the MM-12 is either built-in to the -9H or has hardware built-in to the -9H that is not present on the -9L/E.

And yet we know that that was probably a choice made by PB rather than anything from HG and we know PB has had horrible choices in the field of military vehicle modular designs and following HG notes (e.g. First edition RT Super Veritech, 1ED RT:2 Field guide listing beta's arm joint in jet mode as the hand). For me I house rule. One frame with modular load outs. That said I'd still use suffix designators for troops to know what they're requesting. I just wouldn't have marked it up the way they did... Oh, no L though that would just be the silverback. Silverback with compartment armor H, with sensor turret instead of railgun turret E. But the depicted in the book would be an -9/HE while the E wouldn't have the compartment armor.

[Kagashi]

Yeah, I see how they did this with the Cyclones and the different variants of the Alphas. The Silverbacks were simply following the same template. The Heavy unit is effectively a different mecha with different stats and a reinforced pilots compartment than that of the light unit, and the EW version ALWAYS carries the Beta RADAR, making it a separate entry. I change my view that they should have been presented as a single modular unit, however my stance as an overlooked mecha with little emotional or endearing qualities remains the same. I guess if it was featured in Shadow Rising/Robotech Academy (if either are ever going to be made), my feeling would change on the subject. Till then, like other single frame canon units, Im glad they have stats, but Ill likely never to use them.

I did notice that there is no Silverback entry for "standard features for Silverbacks" like there is for Cyclones, Aphas, Betas, Destroids, and so on. Do you guys just use the Cyclone standard features? After all, its made of a lot of the same modular parts.

[ShadowLogan]

did notice that there is no Silverback entry for "standard features for Silverbacks" like there is for Cyclones, Aphas, Betas, Destroids, and so on. Do you guys just use the Cyclone standard features? After all, its made of a lot of the same modular parts.

They are at the end of the VM-9L entry, it comes just after the HTH stuff. It is Point 5 on the list. In the Manga edition it is on pg170-1

[Kagashi]

Ah, so weird that it is place there, when the layout is standard for all other kinds of mecha within the same book.

[Chris0013]

Yeah, it would have been easier to just have a listing of modular accessories as opposed to different models. But I honestly overlook the Silverback anyway. It got so little play in Prelude and none in the movie...its hard to associate with it and it really does not stand out as a significant mecha stat wise.

I find the Silverback useful as a support asset, nothing more, nothing less. Plus I guess it be good if you can't get Alphas in there area without drawing attention to you.

So... Your opinion on modular units? Should they be a write up or writ UPS?

Yes and no. There are as drewkitty stated there are differences between the 9L and 9H however the 9E could have been a modular package. As for being separate entries I would point to how they did the cyclones which would make some sense, plus I would like to see more variety for modeler packages to give the Silverback more roles. Double points for having a gunpod besides a rail-gun or heavy infantry weapons.

but negitive points for having those gun pods magically adjust in size depending on if it is a human wielding it or the Silverback wielding it.

This was my "HUH-WUT-HUH??!!???!???!" with the Silverback using the same weapons as the Cyclone. I could see mounts on the wheel hubs with the GR-97. But the hand weapons?

[ShadowLogan]

Do we have a comparative pic(s) of the the "human-sized" weapon to compare it to against the Silverback where it can clearly be seen? I only have one pic that is repeated for the Silverback and it doesn't allow the weapon to be easily made out. Still there are ways the Silverback (and ASC PA,once you remove the turret on the Silverback they are all about the same size) can operate human-sized items easily:
-"small" hands
-utility hands that are concealed from view
-it just hold the weapon in its hand, there is some other "remote" mechanism allowing it to fire (like the EU-13/15 on the Alpha, EP-40 on the hub in cycle mode for the Cyclone) are built into the weapons IT (and similar types) is expected to use to actually fire the weapon
-weapons have some type of physical adapter they plug into that allows them to be used by the Silverback

[Chronicler]

Do we have a comparative pic(s) of the the "human-sized" weapon to compare it to against the Silverback where it can clearly be seen? I only have one pic that is repeated for the Silverback and it doesn't allow the weapon to be easily made out. Still there are ways the Silverback (and ASC PA,once you remove the turret on the Silverback they are all about the same size) can operate human-sized items easily:
-"small" hands
-utility hands that are concealed from view
-it just hold the weapon in its hand, there is some other "remote" mechanism allowing it to fire (like the EU-13/15 on the Alpha, EP-40 on the hub in cycle mode for the Cyclone) are built into the weapons IT (and similar types) is expected to use to actually fire the weapon
-weapons have some type of physical adapter they plug into that allows them to be used by the Silverback

Just looked at the art, the hands look a little big for handheld infantry weapons. This was one of the reasons I wanted a dedicated gunpod, but looking at the gun it holds it looks like a reconfigured H-260 (I assume, it would make a little sense, not a lot though). As for using infantry mounted stuff for the hard-points just leave them there and have them fire from those points. Granted the front hubs could only fire in vehicle mode while the back ones could only fire when in battloid mode (look at the art), could still be effective in a fight, double so if the hubs can independently move (or have special mounts to give the weapons more movement freedom like the VR-057's rail mount).

[ShadowLogan]

I am looking at the art, I can't identify the weapon clearly. That pose is the only I've seen for the Battloid mode Silverback. So i can't tell if the weapon has an issue of scale or not.

Hub mounted systems I don't see a problem with scale wise. its the hand-held issue, but as the hubs show us these weapons (even the guns) have to have a means of remote firing. So the Silverback may only need to physically hold the weapon and aim, using the hub approach to issue the fire command.

[Chronicler]

I am looking at the art, I can't identify the weapon clearly. That pose is the only I've seen for the Battloid mode Silverback. So i can't tell if the weapon has an issue of scale or not.

Hub mounted systems I don't see a problem with scale wise. its the hand-held issue, but as the hubs show us these weapons (even the guns) have to have a means of remote firing. So the Silverback may only need to physically hold the weapon and aim, using the hub approach to issue the fire command.

I wish they had more art for the Battloid mode for this. I've also been eyeballing it, doesn't help that the solider looks like he is more in the background than actual side by side. Even then the hand still looks a little big.The weapon looks like the front of the H-260 (look at vehicle mode front "right" hub) but at a really wonky angle (makes it look bigger than it is).

Also I still think it would be neat to have the back hubs as "shoulder" mounted weapons and have the fronts be the detachable "hand held" weapons. More Dakka = better battlefield survivability (this is just an opinion, up armoring is also a viable solution too).

Also looking back at stats between the 9L and 9H the latter has a slight speed advantage due to lighter armor but the later has a slight M.D.C advantage. If they wanted to make them completely different they should have widen the gap and have other differences. Heck the 9H could have been just an upgrade like they did for the VHT when it got their canopy.

[Colonel Wolfe]

I like it how it was written up in the book, works well for a balanced game.

[ShadowLogan]

@Chronicler
Yeah it would be nice to see more than that one Silverback shot as that one makes it hard to determine just what it is holding and how. The "guy" looks like he is there more for a sense of scale, it isn't the size of the hands that concerns me really, its the design of the hand's digits make operating it unlikely. That makes me think it's holding it more for aiming purposes only and "pulling the trigger" has to use some other method than the actual hand (remote command or a concealed "utility hand").

As for the Hubs, I thought that was how they are supposed to work since the front tires on the legs and the rear tires on the shoulders. Don't ask me why the art has the 2 rear hubs empty instead of mounting something useful (like H-260s, EP-37/40s, RL-6s, GR-97s even).

[Zer0 Kay]

I like it how it was written up in the book, works well for a balanced game.

You must be responding to the tangent. I don't see how you could be referring to the OP. What could be balancing about printing the same vehicle three times with the different add-on on, vs. Printing it inc and having the front and side plates, side missile launchers and a radar listed as add on or substitutes?

[Arnie100]

This was my "HUH-WUT-HUH??!!???!???!" with the Silverback using the same weapons as the Cyclone. I could see mounts on the wheel hubs with the GR-97. But the hand weapons?

Is it me or does the H-260 seem weaker then the EP-37 it was supposed to replace?

[Chronicler]

This was my "HUH-WUT-HUH??!!???!???!" with the Silverback using the same weapons as the Cyclone. I could see mounts on the wheel hubs with the GR-97. But the hand weapons?

Is it me or does the H-260 seem weaker then the EP-37 it was supposed to replace?

Went over some math and you are right (wish I could show but forum rules). But the H-260 is more conservative for power usage for the PE-Clip and way lighter making it more of a "light" assault rifle (even though it's a heavy rifle). The EP-37 however has a high damage output but consumes a lot of it's PE-Clip which makes it more of a heavier rifle (or outright hand cannon considering its 60mm bore).

[Tiree]

This was my "HUH-WUT-HUH??!!???!???!" with the Silverback using the same weapons as the Cyclone. I could see mounts on the wheel hubs with the GR-97. But the hand weapons?

Is it me or does the H-260 seem weaker then the EP-37 it was supposed to replace?

Went over some math and you are right (wish I could show but forum rules). But the H-260 is more conservative for power usage for the PE-Clip and way lighter making it more of a "light" assault rifle (even though it's a heavy rifle). The EP-37 however has a high damage output but consumes a lot of it's PE-Clip which makes it more of a heavier rifle (or outright hand cannon considering its 60mm bore).

It's been a while, but I remember doing the math, and it roughly equaled each other. Or the H-260 was basically equal to a Gallant H-90.

In practicality, for my MilSpec Ranger, I ended up using the Gallant H-90 has his primary energy weapon, and the Railgun of the Cyclone as his projectile based weapon. Now the one thing using the Super Cyclone over others, or even the 1E versions, is the lack of missiles hurts. The RL-6 will be a weapon I request for every cyclone from now on.

[ShadowLogan]

This was my "HUH-WUT-HUH??!!???!???!" with the Silverback using the same weapons as the Cyclone. I could see mounts on the wheel hubs with the GR-97. But the hand weapons?

Is it me or does the H-260 seem weaker then the EP-37 it was supposed to replace?

In the short term the H-260 IS weaker than the EP-37 yes when firing bursts or single shots on a given attack. Though it should be noted
-comparing a 5 round burst vs 3 round burst.
-EP-37 also has more range.
-H-260 actually has a greater payload than the EP-37 so in the long run it can do more damage .
-we can trade the H-260 for an EP-40 or H-90 and the same basic facts remain (the H-90 burst firing is more efficient though)

[Jefffar]

How about we get back to Robotech? Thanks.

[Kagashi]

How about we get back to Robotech? Thanks.

Okay,

So, getting back to the topic, using real world examples like the Springfield Trapdoor, a replacement doesnt have to be better.

Warning: So after a moderator deletes almost half the posts in the thread because of a pointless and off topic discussion of the Springfield Trapdoor Rifle, you immediately decide to 'return' to topic by bringing up the Springfield Trapdoor Rifle . . . Obviously, what we hae here, is a failure to communicate. Have a warning.

[jedi078]

The mecha should have been one basic unit, with the others as add-on Upgunned/Armored/EWAR packages. We wold have received the same information as we currently have in the book and have a few extra pages for additional artwork, or gear.

[Seto Kaiba]

Looking back at the art, I've actually revised my opinion from "No" to "Yes".

I was at work, watching a pair of our lab's mechanics replacing a lift gate from a vehicle that'd been damaged... the original lift gate's plastic and glass design was replaced with a hardier one made of steel and carbon fiber. The whole affair took maybe five minutes, if you count sweeping up the broken glass.

That got me thinking... the turret would be harder to change, but the Silverback's up-armored cab could be installed as easily as just hefting the three panels into place and tightening a couple bolts. I went to look at the art, and despite the lamentably poor quality of the print job, there's something that looks an awful lot like a grip point for team-lifting the windscreen armor into position just about level with the center of the driver door window. They don't overlap the roll cage either, they fit INSIDE its spacing. They could stay affixed with clamps or magnets or bolts, but these look like they're designed for easy attachment and removal. The difference in its stats is just the burden of the extra weight from the armor. If the bolts/clamps/etc. are on the inside of the roll cage, the armoring of the cab could take as little as ten or fifteen minutes per vehicle with a two man team.

I don't think a new control system is altogether necessary... even today, it's perfectly possible to attach new modules to an existing vehicle's controller area network on short notice without overloading the bus or changing any pre-existing wiring. The hardware for that radar could easily be integrated into the detachable windscreen armor, which could potentially have control consoles and other screens mounted on its interior surface, and draw power and network over whatever analogue to a CAN bus they're using the way most modern automotive control modules do.

[Zer0 Kay]

Looking back at the art, I've actually revised my opinion from "No" to "Yes".

I was at work, watching a pair of our lab's mechanics replacing a lift gate from a vehicle that'd been damaged... the original lift gate's plastic and glass design was replaced with a hardier one made of steel and carbon fiber. The whole affair took maybe five minutes, if you count sweeping up the broken glass.

That got me thinking... the turret would be harder to change, but the Silverback's up-armored cab could be installed as easily as just hefting the three panels into place and tightening a couple bolts. I went to look at the art, and despite the lamentably poor quality of the print job, there's something that looks an awful lot like a grip point for team-lifting the windscreen armor into position just about level with the center of the driver door window. They don't overlap the roll cage either, they fit INSIDE its spacing. They could stay affixed with clamps or magnets or bolts, but these look like they're designed for easy attachment and removal. The difference in its stats is just the burden of the extra weight from the armor. If the bolts/clamps/etc. are on the inside of the roll cage, the armoring of the cab could take as little as ten or fifteen minutes per vehicle with a two man team.

I don't think a new control system is altogether necessary... even today, it's perfectly possible to attach new modules to an existing vehicle's controller area network on short notice without overloading the bus or changing any pre-existing wiring. The hardware for that radar could easily be integrated into the detachable windscreen armor, which could potentially have control consoles and other screens mounted on its interior surface, and draw power and network over whatever analogue to a CAN bus they're using the way most modern automotive control modules do.

Yay! But, having said that, the bit about the wiring... Not ALWAYS true. There is quite a difference in wiring between the HMMWV or even the uparmored HMMWV and the Avenger. Now that is all assuming that the base unit wasn't designed to already have the radar as a piece of swap out equipment. If that was so, then not only would it already be wired but it is highly likely that either the whole turret is modular or the radar unit is designed to lock into the railgun sockets, seeing as how those railguns IIRC are removable and usable as rifles.

So a different in design between. Hey we need to get armor on this lets design another, hey we need a scout unit
AND
Hey before we put this into production, what roles does it need to fill and how can we make it less expensive? What? Make a unit that we can swap armor out on. With a modular turret socket S we can swap out guns for a radar or anything else we design later and an agile fire control system that can adopt a few external mounted missile pods? That's crazy talk, next you'll be suggesting we make a transformable machi... oh, right veritechs. Okay lets do it.

[Zer0 Kay]

Pg 164 of mangasize RT:SC second column. Item 1. Under weapon systems. Modular rear equipment mount, fourth line "or a reconnaissance and sensor suite"...

It's like they had the write up for the thing and then got the picture and thought,"...naw, this must be different. It looks like the Beta's, nevermind that this one would only be about 11' wide while the Beta's is about 18.5'. Gee, they couldn't possibly just look alike because they use the exact same technology, which does not mean exact same stats. Oh, PB how you need an actual military resource person. At the very less someone who doesn't JUST look at a picture, see the similarities and go "yup they're the same."

My point... The radar on the E is the recon/sensor referred to in the other two printings for the modular rear equipment mount. Also the H doesn't exist as the armored plates in the art are a depiction of the Silverback with its armored plates on. AND those missile pods on the side are just another modular mount. "excuse me sir, do you need more cargo space or more munitions on this trip? More armor or more field of vision? How 'bout your other mounts?" Hey here is a brilliant modification "I want no armor plates, the radar and fabricate me up some boxes that fit two MRMs and then mount railguns on my front tire mounts... And BTW why do my rear wheel hubs mot have additional mount but instead look a lot like the CADS hubs on the saber cyclone? ...Oh, so anyway, then I'd be all set up for anti-air patrol. Or just forget the missiles, get me mounts on those rear tires, put railguns on this too, rig me up a feed system that can feed by belt from the cargo boxes, oh and make sure I can traverse and angle them while on the mounts so I don't have to hold them... Yeah four of those plus the radar for tracking should work... Right?".

[ShadowLogan]

Pg 164 of mangasize RT:SC second column. Item 1. Under weapon systems. Modular rear equipment mount, fourth line "or a reconnaissance and sensor suite"...

Yes there is such an option. However look at the specs for the E and L sensor suites. The E sports the Beta Radar, the L system sports a shorter range/tracking radar compared to the E. So the E and L suites are not the same.

It looks like the Beta's, nevermind that this one would only be about 11' wide while the Beta's is about 18.5'.

It may not be Palladium. In Prelude to the Shadow Chronicles Graphic Novel the E appears (where it is a modular feature of the H, but only the H, however the way Palladium has the E written it is a different model, however they do establish the H and L as different models). It looks like the Beta's, however a keen observer will note that that the E has 4 "bays" and the Beta has 6 "bays" on the mast, so a difference in size is already accounted for.

[Seto Kaiba]

Yay! But, having said that, the bit about the wiring... Not ALWAYS true. There is quite a difference in wiring between the HMMWV or even the uparmored HMMWV and the Avenger.

Yes, but that's not quite the same... you have a lot of variants kitted out for radically different jobs, often involving radically different sets of electronics, and are based on a different chassis design.

Here, we have what appears to be a single, common chassis and frame with turret fixture... and all that's being changed is whether there's armor in the windscreen and door areas, and what's stuck to the pre-existing turret.

Considering the power requirements involved, my assumption would be that the necessary power and network fittings are common to all three versions... which would also be economical for the sheer sake of simplifying production in the UEEF's somewhat-tortured logistical chain. Essentially, I'm saying the armored windscreen with sensors and monitors, and the turret, are probably something approximating "plug and play".

[Zer0 Kay]

Yay! But, having said that, the bit about the wiring... Not ALWAYS true. There is quite a difference in wiring between the HMMWV or even the uparmored HMMWV and the Avenger.

Yes, but that's not quite the same... you have a lot of variants kitted out for radically different jobs, often involving radically different sets of electronics, and are based on a different chassis design.

Here, we have what appears to be a single, common chassis and frame with turret fixture... and all that's being changed is whether there's armor in the windscreen and door areas, and what's stuck to the pre-existing turret.

Considering the power requirements involved, my assumption would be that the necessary power and network fittings are common to all three versions... which would also be economical for the sheer sake of simplifying production in the UEEF's somewhat-tortured logistical chain. Essentially, I'm saying the armored windscreen with sensors and monitors, and the turret, are probably something approximating "plug and play".

How is the HMMWV, HMMWV or HMMWV a different chassis? I figure the development of the Silverback was more like that of the Stryker IFV, where many options were designed from the get go to reduce logistics issues.

[Seto Kaiba]

How is the HMMWV, HMMWV or HMMWV a different chassis? I figure the development of the Silverback was more like that of the Stryker IFV, where many options were designed from the get go to reduce logistics issues.

I was looking more at the special purpose variants that are analogous to the ones in the RPG... there are multiple chassis variants for the HMMWV depending on the weight of mission-specific equipment and other factors. All ECV variants (M1114 and later) are built on a different chassis with improved suspension and more robust drivetrain than the previous models, and many of the special operational variants with heavy weapons or other heavy equipment also have modified chassis arrangements to better distribute the weight of the rear-mounted gear.

(It is, yes, still a much better comparison than the Stryker IFV.)

In this case, it looks more like the Silverback is a single, common chassis design with a single universal turret fitting on the rear... but with a M1151-esque optional uparmoring package and several different optional mounts for the turret position.

[Zer0 Kay]

How is the HMMWV, HMMWV or HMMWV a different chassis? I figure the development of the Silverback was more like that of the Stryker IFV, where many options were designed from the get go to reduce logistics issues.

I was looking more at the special purpose variants that are analogous to the ones in the RPG... there are multiple chassis variants for the HMMWV depending on the weight of mission-specific equipment and other factors. All ECV variants (M1114 and later) are built on a different chassis with improved suspension and more robust drivetrain than the previous models, and many of the special operational variants with heavy weapons or other heavy equipment also have modified chassis arrangements to better distribute the weight of the rear-mounted gear.

(It is, yes, still a much better comparison than the Stryker IFV.)

In this case, it looks more like the Silverback is a single, common chassis design with a single universal turret fitting on the rear... but with a M1151-esque optional uparmoring package and several different optional mounts for the turret position.

Yes.

[Seto Kaiba]

Yes.

I sat down and worked out the weight difference between the uparmored and regular versions...

Taking out the extra railgun on the RPG's -9H variant, you've got about 137.5kg (303lb) of additional armor material strapped to the Silverback's heavier variants vs. the -9L. Rough approximation, you've got two 76lb doors and a 152lb windscreen shield. That's at least within the team lift capacity of normal human beings. The radar Silverback is the same weight as the Heavy Silverback, so its turret fixtures should weigh about the same.

The single railgun is about 22.5kg, so the turret mount is somewhere north of 45kg (99lb), which is also within the team lift capacity for normal humans.

These additional fittings would seem to be more bulky than genuinely heavy, which raise the intriguing possibility that the Silverback could theoretically be converted from one variant to another in the field. Potentially, with minimal tools (or the augmented strength from a Cyclone-wearing helper or two), the change-over could be done in as little as a half hour by an experienced pair of mechanics.

[Nautica]

VM-9L
VM-9H
VM-9E

Is it me or isn't the [VM-9] the chassis and the [L][H][E] like a sub model/package?
It seems to me that most are seeing these 3 Silverbacks as different vehicles.
I took it as this:
1) They are the same vehicle with different internal and external package options.
2) Going back to double check this but the E was the only one listed as having storage for a cyclone for additional recon capabilities. Or did I misread that? If so then the E could have had the chassis altered in such a way to allow the storage of this cyclone as well as the advanced sensor suite. If this is true that would make the change enough to make it its own sub-platform.
3) To further elaborate on 1 and use a modern vehicle to relate this two that I know a bit about: The F/A-18A,B,C,D ( F/A-18 is the platform hmm so is the VM-9 ) The A,B,C, D were assigned to the mods. All 4 A,B,C and D are concidered Legacies (Legacy Hornets) and lack the updates the E,F and G sport. and Visually the A,B,C and D are all Identical ( save for an added light here, or added vent port there ). The A is a single seater and anologue, the B is a dual seater and Anologue. The C and D are their digital updates. There are ground vehicles that see this as well. But this was just the easiest example I could think of. All that said. All four have the same basic capabilities, inputs and functions may be somewhat different more or less reliable but they are the same aircraft. F/A-18. Now to put this toward the VM-9L,H, and E. I believe the H and E ( not counting the E's Advance Sensor Suite ) Have updated sensors attributed to that armored head? This would also mean they would have to have addes cockpit equipment to store, translate, view etc said sensor equipment readouts. ( Ah we have a seperate sub model now. That thus separates the L from the H and E. kind of like the analogue vs digital variants of the F/A-18A and C, or B and D ). Now for the E. The write ups for the advanced sensor suit turret option and the E's sensor suits are different. Making them different. One more advanced then the other. Maybe the internal displays, computer systems and the like are likewise different? More advanced? This would justify having a 3rd sub model in the series. Does this all make sense?

Now I like what Zer0 Kay said earlier. To quote:
"My point... The radar on the E is the recon/sensor referred to in the other two printings for the modular rear equipment mount. Also the H doesn't exist as the armored plates in the art are a depiction of the Silverback with its armored plates on. AND those missile pods on the side are just another modular mount. "excuse me sir, do you need more cargo space or more munitions on this trip? More armor or more field of vision? How 'bout your other mounts?" Hey here is a brilliant modification "I want no armor plates, the radar and fabricate me up some boxes that fit two MRMs and then mount railguns on my front tire mounts... And BTW why do my rear wheel hubs mot have additional mount but instead look a lot like the CADS hubs on the saber cyclone? ...Oh, so anyway, then I'd be all set up for anti-air patrol. Or just forget the missiles, get me mounts on those rear tires, put railguns on this too, rig me up a feed system that can feed by belt from the cargo boxes, oh and make sure I can traverse and angle them while on the mounts so I don't have to hold them... Yeah four of those plus the radar for tracking should work... Right?". "

So fits even with the idea of having three models and not just a single model.

My overall take on the VM-9 Silverback series was as the UEEF replacement of the old VHT the REF used during the sentinels campaign. It has all the capablities ( well save for space operation and limited flight? ) as the VHT's. At any rate it has the firepower to fill the roll of the outdated unit. Just wish the animation in the comics was better. Yay for magic resizing. Is it a stretch to do some reworking to create a gunpod that is visually similar to the H260 and for those Micro Missile Tubes to be SRM Tubes instead? Visually by sheer size it should work no?

Oh and for the unarmored VM-9L. Its an easy claim and far from a big leap to say the doors were removable like the jeeps and humvees used today. And quite possibly the same door that are on the VM-9H and E models. Not that it matters in battloid mode since they are covered by those "Big strong shoulders" **swoons** lol

Sadly I can't base most of any of this on fact since there isn't enough to support in any which way anything on the VM-9. It lacks info. At least that I can find. And is all opinions. Opinions that I put forth half as a question to all those that are more knowledgeable than me as well as simple opinions meant to be food for thought.

[ShadowLogan]

Taking out the extra railgun on the RPG's -9H variant, you've got about 137.5kg (303lb) of additional armor material strapped to the Silverback's heavier variants vs. the -9L. Rough approximation, you've got two 76lb doors and a 152lb windscreen shield. That's at least within the team lift capacity of normal human beings. The radar Silverback is the same weight as the Heavy Silverback, so its turret fixtures should weigh about the same.

The differences between the -9H and -9L though go beyond just armor that contribute to that weight/mass difference as the -9H also trades the "storage boxes" for mini-missile launchers (MM-12*) and more powerful 'muscles**' in Battloid mode ('bot PS of 34 vs 'bot PS of 30 in manga edition, so unless full-size changed it), so the differences are not just in armor that are going to contribute to the added weight/mass.

*It probably is safe to assume the MM-12s empty have more mass than the rigid storage boxes they replace given the need to secure the missiles in the launcher, the launcher also has to mechanically open/close w/o outside intervention, material has to be strong enough to withstand the missile launch (or it has to have a low powered ejection system).

**The Robotic PS rating does increase between the two mecha versions by 13%, which means on of three things either the Silverback is super charging the 'muscles' or it is using beefier 'muscles' or the add-ons bring along a strength booster (though this seems unlikely explanation based on the lineart as the noticeable differences are in the cockpit coverage).

Is it me or isn't the [VM-9] the chassis and the [L][H][E] like a sub model/package?
It seems to me that most are seeing these 3 Silverbacks as different vehicles.

The Silverbacks are presented as different model vehicles of the same family line, the use of letters is consistent with just about every other human mecha in the RT RPG, except the Cyclone which uses the letter to designate "packages" being carried rather than a model variation (VR-057 might be the exception, then again A could just mean no modular features are installed).

My overall take on the VM-9 Silverback series was as the UEEF replacement of the old VHT the REF used during the sentinels campaign. It has all the capablities ( well save for space operation and limited flight? ) as the VHT's. At any rate it has the firepower to fill the roll of the outdated unit.

The Silverback is hardly a decent replacement for the VHTs given the total MDC sported, and there really isn't any reason that the VHTs could not evolve with weapon updates (AAC-11s, HRG-140s) or mount additional weapons (MM-12s, Cyclone FA) and the turret systems could also be mounted internally in a shield or externally. There is also the fact they are designed with a different doctrine and role in mind.