Scott Westerfeld Forum

Scott's Books => Leviathan / Behemoth / Goliath => Topic started by: Xeno-SP on September 17, 2013, 05:19:20 AM

Title: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Xeno-SP on September 17, 2013, 05:19:20 AM
Okay, I know this topic is very old, but i want to see which is better, ja?

It's obviously you guys will vote for the walkers, but let's be realistic. There will be no four-legged or six legged walkers, or any walkers that resemble animals. Just a two-legged walker, like Alek's stormwalker.

Maybe someday we will have two-legged walkers that will replace tanks, but are they really better than tanks?

Let's go back to the days of world war 2, where some country made stormwalkers to combat german panzers. Even though the stormwalkers has an advantage over the tanks like flanking them, the tanks themselves most likely aimed their cannons on the legs. If a walker's leg got busted up, it falls down and the tank finish the job.

I am no tank/walker expert but I have a thought that the stormwalker is just as clumsy as a tank, and I can imagine it getting stuck in a mud.

If you play command and conquer games, the early ones have walkers, but they were later replaced by tanks in later games, because these walking machines can have their legs blown off.

So, which can win the battle?
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: BagpipeHeadache on September 17, 2013, 06:50:51 AM
This is quite difficult. ._.

I think it also depends on loads of situational factors, for example, how many of each type of each combatant on what terrain in what weather...  XD

But it's quite a good question...and it may just end up with the tank blowing the walker's leg off, then the walker falling on the tank, firing its canon, and blowing them both up... 
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Panzercrappitastica on September 17, 2013, 08:06:14 AM
I voted for Stormwalkers, because if there was rough terrain that it was difficult to roll over, the walker could still do it. And I figure the legs are tough enough that they'd be hard to break, because the engineers of walkers probably thought of that.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Xeno-SP on September 17, 2013, 10:24:03 AM
I voted for Stormwalkers, because if there was rough terrain that it was difficult to roll over, the walker could still do it. And I figure the legs are tough enough that they'd be hard to break, because the engineers of walkers probably thought of that.
But if they put armor on the legs, wouldn't it be much slower, like a tiger tank?
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Panzercrappitastica on September 17, 2013, 10:29:54 AM
Probably, but it is made of metal in the first place. It's got to be pretty resilient.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Areias on September 17, 2013, 11:00:37 AM
It all depends on the level of agility. I think it's more likely tanks would win in wet terrain, because a well-designed tank can distribute its weight more evenly and is less likely to get stuck in mud, like the toboggan vs. shoes in snow. On dry ground, it's likely that walkers will be faster than tanks, and can dodge things more easily. They're generally more versatile too, seeing as they can pose (e.g. kneeling), though they are more dependent on the pilot's skill than tanks are.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Time Blitz on September 17, 2013, 11:07:06 AM
*clears throat*

It took me too long to find this....

Second Person has a point. The more armor you stick on a walker's legs, the heavier they get. This would also make the legs more of a target, because they'd be easier to hit due to the bulkiness.

Walkers are clumsy. They can trip, fall, tip over, and the like. Ive never seen a Tiger trip and fall.

Walkers are complicated. More so then tanks. Anyone who knows history knows that the Germans had that problem in WWII. More complicated means easie to break down, more expensive to build, more time consuming to build, and hard to repair, especially in the field of combat, which is critical to survival. In essence, no one wants a complicated machine wih too many gizmos. It looks all pwetty on the parade ground, but has no practical battlefield use.

Walkers also have what's called a tall silhouette. Thats bad. Even if they're kneeling, they're still pretty tall. Many tanks, through ingenuis design, have a vey small silhouette. Which means they're harder to target.

Tanks are more versatile. You can have tanks in the sea (Duplex Drive Shermans), flamethrower tanks (The Crocodile), bridge laying tanks (the Wolverine), and tanks can have their own minesweeping system.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Straif on September 17, 2013, 12:45:47 PM
Also; there's a limit to how big a gun you could put on a walker because of the recoil. Tanks have no such problem.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Panzercrappitastica on September 17, 2013, 12:52:26 PM
All true... Huh, okay. I see your point.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Areias on September 17, 2013, 12:59:17 PM
I do too now. I'm not that interested in war machines and weapons so most of what I said was just guessing. Thanks for the knowledge and explanation :)
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Straif on September 17, 2013, 01:02:07 PM
Though now that I read further, I have to argue ONE point that Blitz made...she mentioned that tanks are more versatile and listed a bunch of others (most, interestingly, based on the M3 Sherman)
My question is; surely the Clankers would have specialized walkers, like, say, the Water-Walkers in Goliath?
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: BagpipeHeadache on September 17, 2013, 01:15:07 PM
That'd make sense unless they weren't particularly bright...

But we must also keep in mind that the Clankers designed their walkers to combat Darwinists fabrications.  ;)
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Straif on September 17, 2013, 01:43:58 PM
Not purely. Every army must prepare for ANY fight after all...I would assume there are "walker killer" models, similar to the tank killers of WWII...
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Areias on September 17, 2013, 01:46:44 PM
The Austro-Prussian war was not far behind at this point, so the German and Austrian armies probably still have anti-Clanker machines, like the Anti-Wanderpanzer Truppen.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Straif on September 17, 2013, 01:51:04 PM
Bingo. And that weird anti-walker gun that Alek smashed.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Time Blitz on September 17, 2013, 04:52:52 PM
Though now that I read further, I have to argue ONE point that Blitz made...she mentioned that tanks are more versatile and listed a bunch of others (most, interestingly, based on the M3 Sherman)
My question is; surely the Clankers would have specialized walkers, like, say, the Water-Walkers in Goliath?

Do you see a flamethrower walker? Or a purely dual land/water walker, such as an adapted stormwalker? Or even anything to compare to the amazing Funnies? I don't.  :)
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Areias on September 17, 2013, 05:54:06 PM
Though now that I read further, I have to argue ONE point that Blitz made...she mentioned that tanks are more versatile and listed a bunch of others (most, interestingly, based on the M3 Sherman)
My question is; surely the Clankers would have specialized walkers, like, say, the Water-Walkers in Goliath?

Do you see a flamethrower walker? Or a purely dual land/water walker, such as an adapted stormwalker? Or even anything to compare to the amazing Funnies? I don't.  :)

To use your tone:

Wrong era. Do you see World War Two anywhere in the books? Do you see any semblance of a large ground battle where Scott showed us everything the Clankers had to offer? Did you think the Manual of Aeronautics is anywhere near exhaustive? I don't.  :)

People seem to have no problem inventing super advanced Darwinist tech, so I don't see why Clankers can't have a few impressive machines of their own. Their level of mechanics most definitely exceed their real world counterparts of the same period.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Straif on September 17, 2013, 07:06:36 PM
My thoughts exactly, once again. The Germans can make (effectivly) ships with LEGS (ala the Beowulf from Leviathan). If they can do THAT...surely they can put floats on a Stromwalker, or install a flamethrower.
The Leviathan universe is, to be completely honest, OBSCENELY large. The novels, unfortunatly, in common young adult writing form, barely scratched the surface of it. Simply put; if its plausible in universe, its possible in universe.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Time Blitz on September 17, 2013, 07:13:53 PM
Now you just POed me.

Or did you not realize we're comparing all tanks with all walkers, stupid?
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Straif on September 17, 2013, 07:15:52 PM
I just read back over it and saw that yes, thats true.
But thats boring. Besides, comparing a Stormwalker (which is, bizzarely, a "light" walker used for scouting) to a MBT isn't exactly an equal equation...
Wish Scott had given us a MBW design...
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Time Blitz on September 17, 2013, 07:16:55 PM
If its so boring, then don't post in this topic.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Straif on September 17, 2013, 07:19:36 PM
Not much else to post on sadly...
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Areias on September 17, 2013, 07:20:17 PM
Now you just POed me.

Or did you not realize we're comparing all tanks with all walkers, stupid?

What is PO?
Also, I'd appreciate if you didn't attack my intelligence when I'm merely pointing out the fact that the books' universe still remains in the era of WWI. Just like you can't compare F-22s with the planes appearing in the series, you can't compare WWII tanks with walkers appearing in the 1910s, at least not fairly.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Straif on September 17, 2013, 07:22:08 PM
PO= Pissed Off.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Areias on September 17, 2013, 07:27:24 PM
Ah. Well now you know how I felt when I read a post said in that tone; and I wasn't even on the receiving end! If I offended you by replying with mimicry I apologize, but you can't feel mad about the exact same thing you did to someone else.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Xeno-SP on September 18, 2013, 03:40:55 AM
People, please. No arguing!!! The reason why I include stormwalker from the alternate ww1 era for the poll is because its almost equal to a tank from the ww2 era. I mean, look at the armor and canon. This walker is best match for a tank, maybe any tank in world war 2. Besides, if leviathan never happens but a country made Stormwalkers, does that mean they are more superior than tanks? Nope, both of them have their own pro and cons.


Four legged walkers like Beowulf can defeat many tanks with ease, but this poll does not include those type of machines. Didn't I say earlier that this is about tanks vs Stormwalkers, not tanks vs all leviathan walkers?
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Straif on September 18, 2013, 03:42:46 AM
If a country can make Stormwalker in OUR universe, SOMEONE is really screwed.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Time Blitz on September 20, 2013, 07:14:36 AM
Men, what do I care anyway? The important thing is I live in reality, and in reality there are no Stormwalkers. Except those made by fanatic Leviathan fans.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Panzercrappitastica on September 20, 2013, 09:16:56 AM
If someone did that, I would simply have to see it.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Time Blitz on September 20, 2013, 09:57:58 AM
Indeed. I concur.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Straif on September 20, 2013, 11:13:09 AM
I'll be made, don't you worry about that. I know a couple people with plans already.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Panzercrappitastica on September 20, 2013, 11:16:10 AM
*gasps* Coolness!
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: TractionEra on September 20, 2013, 11:27:16 AM
Let's just hope people manufacturing bipedal weapons platforms doesn't raise too many red flags and get them shut down. With how paranoid and anti-gun people are nowadays and all.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Straif on September 21, 2013, 05:28:49 AM
They aren't bipedial weapon platforms. Simply bipedial platforms. Walkers, no guns...
Actually, look up "They Shall Walk" and you'll see something thats well on the way...admittedly its more of a mechanised exoskeleton ala the power lifters from every single sci-fi series ever, but its close.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: gavinfuzzy on September 28, 2013, 03:02:30 AM
(http://www.miataturbo.net/attachments/general-miata-chat-9/69789-efr-xidas-media_preview-php-url%3Dhttp%253a%252f%252f0-media-cdn-foolz-us%252fffuuka%252fboard%252ftg%252fimage%252f1342%252f9-jpg?dateline=1363017754)

(http://img824.imageshack.us/img824/1543/br8p.jpg)

(http://imageshack.us/scaled/landing/689/fjnw.jpg)
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Time Blitz on September 28, 2013, 04:40:55 AM
:O me want shiny!
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Flashman on September 30, 2013, 09:41:17 PM
Tank against Stormwalker? Tank, every time. A storm walker is ridiculously complex, and to much can go wrong. Not to mention that the machine gunner's feet kick the captain on a storm walker.

Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Straif on October 01, 2013, 01:49:34 AM
Thats not a downside, bro. That's a way to communicate.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Flashman on October 01, 2013, 01:53:38 AM
Thats not a downside, bro. That's a way to communicate.
True dat.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Straif on October 01, 2013, 01:56:29 AM
They don't have microphones, remember. Meaning that they need some other way for the pilot to direct the walker's fire...
That, and tankers did the same thing in WWII.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Flashman on October 01, 2013, 01:59:32 AM
He could... shout? I'm under the impression that's how things were down in tanks for the most part.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Time Blitz on October 01, 2013, 03:06:54 AM
Depends on whether you're talking about crew-to-crew, or communication between tanks.

Hand signals, Morse code, messenger pigeons....all kinds of ways they communicated in WWI.

Shouting wouldn't be practical....remember, WWI tanks had crews right next to the loud engines.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Flashman on October 01, 2013, 03:11:56 AM
That may be so, but to compare a WW1 tank to a WW1 stormwalker is an unfair comparison.

Also, throughout the series it is never a problem for Alek & Company
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Time Blitz on October 01, 2013, 03:17:11 AM
Fine, if you want to compare WWII panzers with WWI Stormwalkers, its still unfair.

The Germans back then had tank-to-tank radio communication. Which means they probably had crew-to-crew radio too. Meaning all that kicking and shouting wouldn't be needed anyway.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Flashman on October 01, 2013, 03:37:22 AM
TBH, Walkers are absolutely ridiculous.

They've been working on them for, say, 75 years? And they're driving around in fuck-damn Landships. They've been floating around for a generation by the arrival of the Great War, and Tanks were only invented several years after it broke out!

It is hardly fair to compare a modern tank to a storm walker, especially with the ridiculous levels of advancement shown in the Leviathan World.

That being said, Stormwalkers are tin cans full of shit compared to a panzer. For all the wonderful tech required for them to work, they are woefully impractical.

Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Time Blitz on October 01, 2013, 03:46:12 AM
But WWI tanks, such as the Mother, were probably less advanced than the Storm walkers...
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Flashman on October 01, 2013, 03:51:06 AM
But WWI tanks, such as the Mother, were probably less advanced than the Storm walkers...
I agreed with you in my last post... my point is that a Stormwalker, while super advanced, is impractical.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Time Blitz on October 01, 2013, 05:30:55 AM
I know, its just it is unfair to compare WWI tanks to Stormwalkers, in the fact that the tanks might be less advanced.


Now, I really think both are two rather different cups of tea, and it'd be difficult to actually compare the two.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Xeno-SP on October 01, 2013, 06:30:13 AM
Fine, if you want to compare WWII panzers with WWI Stormwalkers, its still unfair.

The Germans back then had tank-to-tank radio communication. Which means they probably had crew-to-crew radio too. Meaning all that kicking and shouting wouldn't be needed anyway.
Panzers and Stormwalkers are still equal....
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Time Blitz on October 01, 2013, 06:36:06 AM
Panzer IIIs, perhaps, but nothing above a Tiger tank would be equal with a Stormwalker.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Xeno-SP on October 01, 2013, 09:00:56 AM
Hmm...but t-34 tanks might work. Early panzers got their ass kicked by these soviet machines on the Easter Front.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Time Blitz on October 01, 2013, 09:12:43 AM
Only in the beginning, actually. I know people like to glorify the T-34, but in reality, it didn't take long for it to become outclassed by King Tigers and Panthers. In fact, the Russians had a real problem with that and they couldn't get out new and improved tanks out in a timely manner.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Flashman on October 01, 2013, 11:44:16 PM
My knowledge of tanks are admittedly light, so; weren't russian tanks rushed out of production quickly, to overwhelm the Germans? Or were they amde heavy to combat the fairly light armor of German tanks?

Sorry if this is a stupid question.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Time Blitz on October 02, 2013, 01:12:43 AM
A little bit of both. The Russians did panic, but they also had neat stuff in the beginning. Towards the end though, it was mostly panicking to match stuff like the Panther.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Flashman on October 02, 2013, 01:18:20 AM
Thanks. I assumed they used a tactic similar to that of Russian infantry.

How much neat stuff could they have had before the war? They had just come out of civil war, and were in the middle of  a famine...

Anyways, any tank except a WWI Landship would kick a walkers delicate ass.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Time Blitz on October 02, 2013, 01:23:48 AM
Lol, landship was the general term for all tanks back then. If you mean "except for the Mother", then yes.

The Russians had the invention and usage of sloped armor at the beginning of the war, and the Germans didn't. Remember, a fed-up American inventor went to show them sloped armor and an improved suspension system.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Flashman on October 02, 2013, 01:31:15 AM
Lol, landship was the general term for all tanks back then. If you mean "except for the Mother", then yes.

The Russians had the invention and usage of sloped armor at the beginning of the war, and the Germans didn't. Remember, a fed-up American inventor went to show them sloped armor and an improved suspension system.
Yes- all tanks from the WW1 era were shite. Unless the term was more common then tank during the second Great War?
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Time Blitz on October 02, 2013, 01:40:41 AM
True, although some of the later WWI tanks might stand a chance...
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Flashman on October 02, 2013, 01:42:35 AM
Still far to slow and hard to manuever in comparison to a Stormwalker. Also, I believe it has a smaller guns.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Time Blitz on October 02, 2013, 01:43:29 AM
The British 6 pounders...hehehe....
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Flashman on October 02, 2013, 01:45:23 AM
How big was the Cyclop's gun anyways?

Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Time Blitz on October 02, 2013, 01:49:52 AM
I don't know, actually...
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Flashman on October 02, 2013, 01:53:06 AM
Probably say in the book... But a Stormwalker would circle a Great War tank as it desperated tried to swivel it's cannons, and rain down shells on it.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Time Blitz on October 02, 2013, 03:41:15 AM
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Heavy_Tanks_of_World_War_I
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Flashman on October 02, 2013, 03:56:20 AM
What does that have to do with anything?
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Time Blitz on October 02, 2013, 04:08:34 AM
WWI HEAVY TANKS Flashman. It has a lot to do with this topic.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Flashman on October 02, 2013, 04:45:17 AM
It does, but the ystill crash and die against a stormwalker.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Time Blitz on October 02, 2013, 04:48:18 AM
I never said it wouldn't. I'm providing accurate data so we can assess to what extent it would.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Panzercrappitastica on October 02, 2013, 08:00:52 AM
How big was the Cyclop's gun anyways?
The main gun is a 57-millimeter cannon that fires 3-kilogram shells, and there's also two Spandau MGo8 machine guns on either side of the pilot's cabin, although only one can be fired at a time. *does a happy dance because (I think) I helped*
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Time Blitz on October 02, 2013, 08:07:14 AM
The smallest tank gun was a 50. Caliber machine gun.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Panzercrappitastica on October 02, 2013, 08:11:18 AM
And, I can no longer be helpful :P Oh well.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Nightwatcher on November 04, 2013, 11:48:17 AM
Tanks seem more sturdy
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Time Blitz on November 04, 2013, 11:49:32 AM
Yep yep yep. Panzers = ownage.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Nightwatcher on November 04, 2013, 11:49:56 AM
Hm... I'm more bias to the M1A1 Abrams...
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Time Blitz on November 04, 2013, 11:54:03 AM
WARNUNG: Tank lover correction!

You should mean M1A2 SEP Abrams....;)
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Nightwatcher on November 04, 2013, 11:54:33 AM
WARNUNG: Tank lover correction!

You should mean M1A2 SEP Abrams....;)
I guess so... yeah, I'm more of a Naval person
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Time Blitz on November 04, 2013, 11:56:16 AM
I guess my opinion is a little biased...

Hi I'm Panzer btw. Not to be confused with the other Pan. My username is strictly WW2 based. I'm also a 16 year girl, too. Everyone thinks I'm a guy...
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Nightwatcher on November 04, 2013, 11:58:35 AM
I guess my opinion is a little biased...

Hi I'm Panzer btw. Not to be confused with the other Pan. My username is strictly WW2 based. I'm also a 16 year girl, too. Everyone thinks I'm a guy...
It's understandable I hope, the misconstruation... tanks are stereotyped as "guy things." I'm 16 too. we have so much in common!  ;D
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Time Blitz on November 04, 2013, 12:02:02 PM
You're another tank lover too?!? Awesome! Are you rational, scientific, but still Christian too? (I'm a highly rational Catholic and I want to meet someone like that cos everyone here is on both ends of the extreme spectrum)
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Nightwatcher on November 04, 2013, 12:04:36 PM
You're another tank lover too?!? Awesome! Are you rational, scientific, but still Christian too? (I'm a highly rational Catholic and I want to meet someone like that cos everyone here is on both ends of the extreme spectrum)
No joke. Its surprising to find little rationality in the bulk of the church, who should be accepting logic and rationality. And I simply like tanks... I'm not knowledgeable on them... again, I'm more a navy person.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Time Blitz on November 04, 2013, 12:09:38 PM
I had a rp awhile ago that had sentient aircraft carriers...

Like I can actually use the Big Bang to prove God's existence. You really can. The Catholic Church teaches that God and science are meant to complicate each other....when one contradicts, you're understanding one or both wrong.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Nightwatcher on November 04, 2013, 12:12:16 PM
I had a rp awhile ago that had sentient aircraft carriers...

Like I can actually use the Big Bang to prove God's existence. You really can. The Catholic Church teaches that God and science are meant to complicate each other....when one contradicts, you're understanding one or both wrong.
exactly. Science can prove a lot of stuff: Who, what, when, where, but not the how and why
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Time Blitz on November 04, 2013, 12:14:16 PM
No, it can prove the how and why. It can also prove God did it, if you know how to read it right. It can't tell you why God did it or the exact manner in which He set it into motion, but it can explain the motion.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Nightwatcher on November 04, 2013, 12:15:00 PM
No, it can prove the how and why. It can also prove God did it, if you know how to read it right. It can't tell you why God did it or the exact manner in which He set it into motion, but it can explain the motion.
yeah, that's what I meant. I fail at brevity
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Time Blitz on November 04, 2013, 12:16:35 PM
*baby Tiger 2 tackles you*
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Nightwatcher on November 04, 2013, 12:21:47 PM
*leans forward and looks strangely at the picture of the tiger 2 pouncing onto air* I'm afraid you missed.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Time Blitz on November 04, 2013, 12:22:40 PM
You know what a Tiger is?
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Nightwatcher on November 04, 2013, 12:23:56 PM
You know what a Tiger is?
It's a tank, is it not? German made, Volkswagen engine WWII?
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Time Blitz on November 04, 2013, 12:25:12 PM
King tigers made here!

No, silly, it was Porsche who made Tiger tanks!
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Nightwatcher on November 04, 2013, 12:28:40 PM
King tigers made here!

No, silly, it was Porsche who made Tiger tanks!
Well I tried.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Areias on November 04, 2013, 12:37:21 PM
About the church vs. science thing, I really don't think it's the Catholics who are less tolerant of evidence nowadays. The problem lies with most of the American churches, especially those based in the south, where Young Earth Creationism runs rampant. Catholicism has done very well modernizing and accepting science (Dan Brown's depiction of it in Angels & Demons does have a kernel of truth).

I wouldn't say we're all on the extremes of the spectrum here, though. I'm a rational person, but I'm also an agnostic theist, which means that while I do not know since there is no evidence, I do believe in the existence of a god (not the Christian God), who set the universe in motion. I also believe in traditional Taoist and Buddhist gods as pertaining to my culture, though it's funny how Asian religions rarely have a problem with accepting evolution and the like. I think it is because they do not have a singular holy scripture, but instead is embodied through ways of thinking and living.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Time Blitz on November 04, 2013, 12:39:01 PM
Btw Nightwatcher, Nhan Shateuck-Ja is a Melkane, sentient Abrams-like tanks. In Nhan's case, he's a visiting intergalactic entrepenuer.

Coolio.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Nightwatcher on November 04, 2013, 12:39:59 PM
Catholicism is the driving force behind science and truth, has been since the start.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Areias on November 04, 2013, 12:42:12 PM
Catholicism is the driving force behind science and truth, has been since the start.

Disagreed. Look no further than Copernicus and Galileo. The Catholic Church (the Church, not the religion) has been generally quite bad at handling progress until post-19th century.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Time Blitz on November 04, 2013, 12:43:12 PM
I agree. They were quiet misguided and fearful of change. Which I kinda get why though.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Nightwatcher on November 04, 2013, 12:45:35 PM
Catholicism is the driving force behind science and truth, has been since the start.

Disagreed. Look no further than Copernicus and Galileo. The Catholic Church (the Church, not the religion) has been generally quite bad at handling progress until post-19th century.
True. The people in general were afraid, but the magisterium itself actually supported and endorsed Galileo's works. When Galileo began to speak out against the church was he imprisoned
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Straif on November 05, 2013, 08:10:14 AM
Aw, Blitz found another friend!
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Nightwatcher on November 05, 2013, 11:31:59 AM
Hello other forumer!
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Straif on November 05, 2013, 11:37:45 AM
Hi.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Xeno-SP on November 07, 2013, 10:00:08 AM
So, about the Tiger Tank from the last page...
Tiger tanks are cool and powerful, but they require a lot of fuel and ammo, and their engines can easily break most of the time. Engineers will always have a hard time fixing the engines.
I like the Tiger's firepower and armor overall, but it is not enough for the Germans to win the war against the Allies.
And there is one of the reasons why Germany lost the war. The Nazis are so busy concentrating developing advanced tanks that they wasted their time and resources to fight the Allies. If they can produce lots of Panzer tanks, they would have barely won. I mean, imagine a Tiger tank, after all the hard work and money produced by the Germans, was suddenly destroyed on its first mission without firing a single shot. What a waste of economic benefit.
Even a Walker can easily outflank and defeat the Tiger tank, since that heavily armored boy's turret speed is too slow and it moves like a turtle. In my opinion, only Panzer III or IV can defeat a Walker, since medium tanks are a match for two-legged tanks like Alek's
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Time Blitz on November 07, 2013, 12:06:44 PM
I was having baby tigers tackle someone -_-

Of course, the King Tiger and especially the Panther were improvements...

The Panther wasn't hard to make, was rather reliable, had very good range and armor, and was potent. They just didn't have enough time (and they were running out of resources cos of all the other projects) to build a great number.

Thank God no Rattes though....
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Xeno-SP on November 07, 2013, 12:16:19 PM
I was having baby tigers tackle someone -_-

Of course, the King Tiger and especially the Panther were improvements...

The Panther wasn't hard to make, was rather reliable, had very good range and armor, and was potent. They just didn't have enough time (and they were running out of resources cos of all the other projects) to build a great number.

Thank God no Rattes though....
Rattes? Yeah, that big boy can destroy up to ten tanks. But the bigger they are...the more easier the bombers can drop their load. You are a main target if you are big. You can bring fear, but what's that gonna do? Scare the "birds" away?
And a large number of walkers can easily outflank it and destroy it. But like you said, thank God there are no Rattes. It's awesome on that tank, but a waste of time and resources. Don't forget it's super slow! The tank is nothing more an artillery.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Time Blitz on November 07, 2013, 01:04:25 PM
Rattes are still impressive though.

I've always been a dreamer when it came to super tanks. Especially if they might involve AIs...doesn't a sentient tank just sound cool?
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Xeno-SP on November 07, 2013, 01:38:25 PM
I don't know...I prefer humans controlling the tanks. If an AI controls a tank, what will happen if it malfunctions, and it turn against its masters. Sure, we don't want human lives lost when their tank is destroyed, but a sentient. That's kinda new, but what would happen if it suddenly becomes self aware...  :o
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Time Blitz on November 07, 2013, 09:36:08 PM
But you'd want it self aware. That's the point. If it happened, Abrams brigades could be deployed and allowed to coordinate their own strategies. Read the Bolo series.
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Xeno-SP on November 12, 2013, 05:49:53 AM
Happy Veteran's Day!  ;D
Wow, the poll results are tied...it keeps better and better!
But no matter how technological superior the stormwalker is, the panzer III and IV will always win the day! BANZAI!!
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Straif on November 12, 2013, 10:20:23 AM
Not against the Hellcat tank destoryer...
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Time Blitz on November 22, 2013, 01:15:35 PM
(http://i43.tinypic.com/flldmg.jpg)

Tiger says "Rawr!"

 (http://i42.tinypic.com/30wb6nb.jpg)
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: SS Commander on November 24, 2013, 03:13:37 AM
hi  8)
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Time Blitz on November 24, 2013, 03:14:49 AM
The balance has shifted! Tanks win!
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: SS Commander on November 24, 2013, 03:22:07 AM
yay
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Xeno-SP on November 24, 2013, 10:40:38 PM
The balance has shifted! Tanks win!
It's not over...the battle is never over...I mean, we will be stuck in this eternal war.

Oh, about that post with the Tiger.

The Panther is much more superior and reliable.

The Tiger is powerful but has severe mechanical problems. Just saying.

...But if the Walkers are at a distances, the Tigers will take them out with ease. Which is why the balance has turned to the Tanks' favor. Yet, we are only lucky!
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Time Blitz on November 25, 2013, 12:47:39 AM
The Tiger post had nothing to do with this, it was just random. I saw the animal tiger face and thought it'd be funny...

Anyway, I'm aware of the Tiger I's mechanical issues (although, in the King Tiger, that wasn't as much of a problem).
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Xeno-SP on May 02, 2015, 04:07:47 PM
The Tiger post had nothing to do with this, it was just random. I saw the animal tiger face and thought it'd be funny...

Anyway, I'm aware of the Tiger I's mechanical issues (although, in the King Tiger, that wasn't as much of a problem).

Haha!  ;D

I miss this topic so much. Miss the good old days!

Back then, I used to dislike the Tiger 1. But as I play World of Tanks non-stop, I managed to get a Tiger. It was unpleasant at first, but then I grew to love it along with my favorite tanks: Hetzer, KV-1, KV-1s, and Stug 3.

Wish they made a World of Clankers video game....and a World of Tanks/Clankers as an added bonus.

Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Time Blitz on May 03, 2015, 08:02:53 AM
I has an account on WoT, but I only play Tanktastic.

I also have my own clan. ^^
Title: Re: Tanks vs Stormwalkers
Post by: Xeno-SP on May 10, 2015, 07:44:49 AM
I has an account on WoT, but I only play Tanktastic.

I also have my own clan. ^^
LoL!!! Awesome!!!

But I only play the IPad version of WoT. It's called WoT Blitz.

Currently right now, I am trying to gain a King Tiger when I have enough experience points.
And then I'll get a E 75!!!