Are Metal Gears theoretically Possible?

The ICBM part came later, didn't it? The front part was an actual functional battle tank.

@ Tzetze

edited 8th Mar '11 9:28:39 PM by Spirit

The major point of contention is that Metal Gears and equivalent vehicles that perform as portrayed would wipe the battlefield clean of older weapons. Problem is that we can't make them perform as portrayed unless we take a shotgun to the laws of Physics.

I've always wondered why the Metal Gears seemed to have so much focus on close ranged combat. Based on the whole nuke-launching role you'd expect them to not waste time on all the other stuff. It's supposed to be hidden anyway, right?

Well, so that the player can fight them, obviously. Wouldn't be much fun to fight a missile silo.

The ICBM part came later, didn't it? The front part was an actual functional battle tank.

They're described as the missing link between uh something and artillery, aren't they?

The proposed design of the Shagohod was to design an untraceable inter-continental nuke. That's why the rail gun was attached to a vehicle: The purpose was to add extra force to the initial launch. The tank part was mainly secondary.

Theoretically, that was a good design. Practically, it wouldn't be practical.

edited 8th Mar '11 10:07:06 PM by Scardoll

We must MAKE IT possible, because as you all know, the only thing that can defeat a Metal Gear is another Metal Gear. Or, possibly, two Wooden Gears.

I just realized that Metal Gears aren't just theoretically possible.

They're already everywhere.

...

/me tosses a shoe at Recon 5

/hands Charlatan another shoe.

(Clicks on link)

TOP GEAR?!?

Cyborg Ninja was The Stig.

Impossible. The Stig never reveals any part of his face.

Richard Hammond is Liquid in disguise, and he did that car crash to trick the patriots into ignoring him.

Oh, I'm sorry, I mispelled that. What I should have typed was LIQUID!!!!

OBJECTION!!!

The Shagohod (Why do people write it as Shagoh Ad?) Was destroyed in battle not for lack of practicality, but because Volgin had the brilliant idea of going agaisnt a motorcicle, and risk ruining the vehicle he had been waiting to use since god knows when. Theoretically, Volgin's a great military commander, Practically, he's a Bond Villain.

Okay, but what the hell kind of tank can get taken down by a motorcycle? Even if it is ridden by Bond Snake.

Snake is the anti-tank. Besides, an ICBM launching tank isn't built to fight infantry.

Snake WISHES he was Bond, man. Remember the tuxedo cheat from the first game? That was cool. :3

The Brits have Bond.
We have Snake.
I'd say that's fair.

Where «we» = Japan?

Japan has Snake, USA has the better Snake.

Null speaks the truth. When I was young and ignorant and on the MGS 1 hype, I thought nobody could beat Solid Snake and to think he took his name and likeness from a KURT RUSSEL movie made me laugh.

When I finally saw the movie I realized how stupid I'd been. Plisken would wipe the floor with Solid. No contest.

Australia gets Mad Max. I guess Canada gets Scott Pilgrim, 'cause I don't know of any other Canadian characters...

Mad Max wins. Truckality!

I think that (s)he was referring to nationality of Snake, not the nationality of the man who created him.