Will Mechs REPLACE Tanks? 

WOW. 😀 This video really blew up (for me), thanks for the views and comments! What topic would you guys like me to cover next??

True mech fans know about all these weaknesses. *True mech fans do not care* .

I want to say , that all these are good points... IF the mechs acted ALONE. In combat you are never alone, in fact a sensible strategy is in a combined arms approach where each unit (tanks, infantry, planes, ... Mech ) complement and protects each other weakness in combat. Mechs could be used as scouts or support infantry/tanks as a good mobile gun. (Think light tanks in ww2) though they wouldn't be able to get many AT hits.

The only viable use I can think of for real mechs would be in fortifying locations rapidly and in city warfare since they're most likely skinner then a tank they can go through alley ways tanks normally couldn't go through

A tank with mech like apendiges would be able to move over ridges and hard to move over ground while having the sturdiness and firepower of a tank

If focused on one genre of the mecha puzzle then yes. Battlemechs have a place on the field. In battletech, the use of battlemechs was incorporated into combine arms. You still had your tanks, fighters and troops. Mechs on the other hand served as forward force projection, were able to bring more weapons per tonnage and move around the terrain. This allowed mechs to specialize into scouts, direct fire and fire support roles. In the early years of the BT universe, it was all about warships and nukes. What the houses couldn't obtain, they would just glass. This caused the creation of the Ares accords that banned WMDs from being used on the planets ruled over by the houses. In turn, war became a sport. In almost every engagement, it was warships and armies cracking the defenders. When the first battlemech rolled onto the field (the Makie) in its first fight, the Terrain Hedgemony military steamroll a tank colum of tanks fileted by the Draconis Combine. The survivors of the one sided battle showed 4 assault class mechs kicking over, stomping and shooting tanks as they were nothing. Their weaponry did nothing as improved armor on the mechs absorbed any hit. What it did was strike fear and the need for these machines. Eventually tanks and fighters were able to catch up in offensive power to fight battlemechs. However it's the Power plant that limits their usefulness. A mech is independent as long as it's pilot is fed and the ammo bins are full.

Depending on how the mech is made it could dominate in various ways. If we go for Titanfall as basis. The mobility could dominate in urban areas as well as how easy it can drop in. Climb buildings etc. Also various computer being installed, missile pods etc. They would need to make 5 different takes. They could make 1 mech and 5 different guns. Fighting infantry: a mini gun, magnetic shrapnel launcher (depending how far railguns go). Shotguns. Anti tank: missiles pods built in. Tip tanks over as well change the surroundings, knocks down trees, make ditches, And everything which is new is complex. If we gave a top notch modern tank and gave it to a tank factory form ww2 or ww1. Like we see in various mech on Titanfall. Multi lock with missile pods. If you can fire 10 anti tank missiles which can fire individually and lock on too then having 5 extra tanks would be ineffective. Railguns are approaching the scene slowing and they would and could play huge role in mechs if they was ever to be developed

The technology is here (there is already something very similar to myomer bundles under development) but the biggest problem to overcome is a powerful enough power source that lasts long enough.

*>Has tank* *>Invents mech* *>Throw away tank* *>Enemy makes mech* *>Makes tank for mech*

mechs probably have the most potential in construction because of their versatility

Your use of the word Mechwarrior instead of battlemech made my fusion reactor overheat and shut down.

"Bipedalism, a distinctive human trait" you should meet my mate Diogenes

The true enemy of the mech is cube law.

The big answer "No". Smaller mechs will have a use as heavy support units for conventional infantry. They will be slightly larger than a man, with the firepower of an APC

Probably a good Idea to Leave out Gundams. I would Add Armored Cores.

17:42 The robot can gently handle babies... ROBOT PROCEEDS TO THROW A BRICK

The word is Battlemech, the pilots are Mechwarriors

Had to trim out a few seconds of the video at 1:46 due to copyright infringement from using a Pacific Rim clip. Sorry bout that!

Getting something that big to walk isn't super energy efficient. Wheelin is so much easier.

NerdPunch: Talking about how powerful Titanfall mechs are. Me: Laughing in imperial gothic. Also me: May the Emperor spare your soul heretic.

As an armor crewman in the army, tank commander and master gunner for most of it, I really enjoyed this video. Thanks.

As a note: In the Battletech universe, Mechs are actually incredibly expensive and only fielded in certain conditions, usually full scale invasions. Tanks and Infantry are, canonically, still the majority bulwark of any invading army/fleet in Battletech and many tanks can carry the same weapons as a Battletech. The Rommel for instance, carries an AC/20 which is specifically made to hunt Mechs. 5 to 7 Rommels could, through planning or utilizing their smaller profile, take down anything as big as an Atlas. Battletech never makes the statement that Mechs replace tanks period but rather Mechs become the MBTs of most armies instead.

The term "MechWarrior" from BattleTech refers to the pilots. The machines are called BattleMechs. A MechWarrior is a pilot (a human).

Power armor might be the way forward if tech advances far enough

Mechs should be small sized, like the ones from Avatar, they will be extremely useful in construction of fortifications

No mention of 40k Titans? The Inquisition would like to have a word with you.

A new weapon platform will almost never render an older one obsolete. Horses didn't render foot-soldiers obsolete, neither did the tank, and aircraft didn't render ground forces obsolete. A military walking vehicle has strengths and weaknesses that could potentially make it a good compliment to other military vehicles. Though I wouldn't expect giant doom mechs any time. More something slightly bigger than a human, that bridges the gap between infantry and armour by being a fast attack platform with lots of AT weapons. I'd imagine quadrupeds or even more legs, something that can skitter around in tight areas like cities and hunt tanks and infantry. That and walkers made to lug around heavy shit following soldiers like robot pack mules into places wheeled vehicles cannot traverse. The few times in history something replaced something else are generally the exception in war. Most of the time new technologies end up as bedfellows on the battlefield. Also, remember that horses, machine-guns, tanks, crossbows, rifles and aircraft were all once seen as silly and too complex to work in war. Every new weapon of war is a stupid idea, until one day, it isn't anymore. It's hard to tell what the next revolution will be, so dismissing anything is not a great idea. *Edit:* The crybabies responding to this comment are real. The reading comprehension isn't. You people are sad, really sad, get a fucking life.

I think one of the most important issues a Mech faces, wasn't named … The Powerplant that makes it move ! It would have to sit right where they put the pilot.

Watching your video just made me realize something very important I missed so far. First, what is a tank ? A mobile gun. Or self-propelled gun, if you wish. That's all it will ever be. It has it's uses for sure, you may need a specific type of gun to do a specific job. A mech is essentially a soldier clad in armor and carrying big guns. There is no way you can replace tanks with mechs because they do different jobs. Hence, THE MECH IS THE NEXT EVOLUTIONARY STEP FOR THE COMMON SOLDIER, and not the tank.

Is it weird that this video makes me want to watch 'Mobile Suit Gundam: The 08th MS Team'?

You make the argument that the humanoid, bipedal form is superior. I would disagree on the basis that this is a very closed way of thinking. A mech should not be characterized by biological creatures as the mech has near limitless possibilities. Tracks, quadropeds with multiple arms, bipeds, a mech is only limited by your imagination and the practicality of the designs. A quadroped is more stable that a biped and a mech can utilize the advantages of 4 legs and have additional appendages available for utilizing different weaponry and enhancing the pilots own ability to be resourceful. Good video overall, sparks some interesting conversations and leads to some amazing ideas. Keep it up.

Well, seeing through human history, especially XIX and XX century i would say "Not yet" not "Not ever". There are few things that for us are common and managable but if you would explain them to a average human 150 or 200 years ago he would laugh at you. Combustion engine: So you are telling me you deliberately seat near, or on, a device which entire purpose is to create multiple explosions? Hah, right Plane: And you put those, on a wooden and canvas kite-like constructions to fly? Insane. Nuclear powerplant: Soooo you divided a thing that you tell me does exist but cannot be seen, which caused an explosion that wiped 2 whole cities, and can render a patch of land uninhabitable.... an then you decided that it can also work as a powerplant.... and you put it on a boat that supposedly runs underwater... with no air..... for months.... and can shoot targets on the other side of the planet? You nuts? Space travel: sooo you shoot people in giant rockets out of the earth so they can basically check how it is up there... and then there was a guy who put a "car" on it and shot it towards other planet, just because he could.... ok.... OH and the rocket landed? Yeaaah someone get the white suits here, this man lost his mind. And on and on and on. Granted, in our current state of technology its impractical (but no longer impossible, just extremely expensive) but that doesnt mean that itll be impractical forever. We just need one person/company/goverment creating one "because we can and we can afford it", check if it works and if it does, i guarantee others will do it aswell. There were far more "useless" inventions that worked.

so instead of mechs...we should have ZOIDS!

Lols, do what Armored Core did, put a robot torso on a tank tread for legs...with a bunch of rocket boosters.

As a mech fan, i can't argue with any of those points. The only real advantage a mech could have is when space weapons are used. Presenting a smaller target from above compared to a wide long footprint of a tank. Though even that would be relatively limited with modern/futuristic targeting systems. The only reason left for mech is that they are cool! lol

Here it is, my first video with more to come hopefully once a week. My goal with this channel is to get some fun and detailed discussions going on random nerdy topics. This is stuff I talk about with friends, and I want to bring those discussion to you guys too. This was a lot of fun to research and create, and I got to spend some time inside an Abrams tank talking with the crew to help with the video. I want to get better with each video too, so let me know what you want out of these videos. I'm definitely working on/getting comfortable with creating scripts and recording myself, so sorry if this first one's a bit off at points. Hope you enjoy it! If you have any nerd questions about anything leave'em in the comments and I'll make a video on it. Obligatory first video rant over!

The start of a legend

the mechwarrior is the pilot not the mech itself!. this misuse bothers me a lot more than it should

"Smooth ride" is not a correct statement for a tank^^ its actually more like a speedy boatride over medium waves...

"What if instead of normal boots, we made all our soldiers wear articulated stilts?"

I think the greatest thing to do with mechs, is to mix them in a combined arms group. A table top known as Heavy Gear utilizes mechs and Tanks. Height is a problem, and shouldn't ever get more than 30 feet at most. I can't see them in the same kind of battles as tanks, but working side by side with air, infantry, APCs/IFVs, and tanks, a mech could add another bit of versatility to the whole side. Still, as much of an advocate as I am for them, I know that they have flaws as well but this has been said from the very beginning as weapons and tools change over time.

As someone that works on hydraulics and heavy duty equipment for a living. Hydraulics are soooo not ready to work legs in a combat zone. One bullet , you blow a line and your down even if its armored, we have many ways of putting small holes in armor, a high pressure systems worst nightmare... electric motors may be a possibility, but I dont think we're there yet . It's fun to think about tho 😄

The thing to keep in mind is that, even in the universe of Battletech, mechs didn't replace tanks. They're simply another weapons platform that's utilized when the situation calls for it..

GUYS I DID TONS OF RESEARCH ON THIS! LET ME TELL YOU WHY WE DON'T BUILD MECHWARRIORS. Like seriously dude, you can't even get the basic name right?

I don't even have to watch the video to know the author knows nothing about proper tank warfare.

Honestly both tanks and mechs have advantages and disadvantages, this debate has gone for too long lmao. Thats why alot of sci fi factions use both tanks and mechs . The Imperium of man, UNSC , The galactic empire all uses both fot various scnarios Tanks are cheaper and easier to make plus they are smaller targets and can pack more of a punch, tracks are also cheaper than robot legs and easier to repair infield , larger superheavy tanks are more for symbolism and morale boost Mechs are more versatile and expensive, they can do many things a tank cant like climb or fly , they have an easier time targeting because of their height but also makes them easier targets. People keep arguing over which is better but i say why not both?

A battlemech cannot replace tanks, but small mechs or robots with only small arms or light ordenance, mybe a bit bigger than humans. could be a complementary vehicle to tanks and infantry.

Personally I doubt they'll replace tanks, but they can still be useful.

Every time he said Mechwarriors, i died a little inside, they are battlemechs not mechwarriors ffs, mechwarriors are the pilots. Mechwarriors come from the Battletech universe.

'Mechs are powered by compact fusion reactors in Battletech and balanced by a multi-ton gyroscope with inputs from the pilots neurohelmet using his/her own sense of balance, all things we dont really have now but...theyre still awesome and I want one.

Explain how I built a Zaku II just last week, checkmate.

Tanks are by all means superior in concept, and was formed of necessity, mechs are a work of fiction. They are not great weapon platforms, but might be used for construction and various logistical purposes.

most of these mechs are powered by nuclear reactors which kinda does and doesn't solve the fuel problem because that becomes more of production vulnerability, additional costs and complexity as well as a political nightmare to stir it all up. I think a great thing to look into for mech progression is Armored core, where they gradually evolved from basically walking gun platforms, to thruster-powered hover-mechs into mechs with 3D-capable movement possibly even achieving true flight, being vastly more agile than anything conceived of today.

mechs in titanfall started off as exo suits for terra forming planets and mainly used as wide spread farm equipment. when the war broke out, they just tossed guns on the mass produced farm equipment then went to war

With all due respect, he doesn’t know his battle tech lore. This is all explained in the lore.

A "mechwarrior" is the pilot of a battlemech or omnimech in the BattleTech/MechWarrior franchise. Also, yes, flat-facing armor is effectively thinner when struck from the front. But if you fire on sloped armor from a high angle, the same is true.

100% agree. as a person in the army I say a small armored exo suit would be the best thing sense it would help in urban and any other environments, and could be useful in any situation this is what is needed.

The truth is that any technology that would make a giant mech possible, could be applied to tanks instead for a better result. The only use I can think of for a giant humanoid robot would be search and rescue, something that can grapple down a cliff side and pull up a car or something.

Lot of errors/inaccuracies throughout. -MechWarriors are the pilots (not the 'mechs). -Almost every ballistic 'mech features autoloaders. This wouldn't be a manned requirement. Also, modern tanks have begun to eliminate the loader position. -Tanks Very Likely aren't going to be traveling at "45 Mi/hr over rough terrain;" that's unrealistic. 35 Mi/hr on rough terrain is more reasonable. 45 to 50 Mi/hr would be reserved for a smooth (and open) road. You can go faster without a limiter, but offroading is still a limfac. -Ball-bearing factory strikes had a very limited effect on the war effort in WWII, and post-implementation production is outside the relevant scope of the topic at hand. -Transportation is generally covered in core 'mech fiction. The consideration for mass vs size is definitely relevant (and probably the only noteworthy inclusion in your hypothesis), but the short answer as to why battlemechs haven't been developed/implemented is that there are critical factors which haven't yet been met: necessity, practicality, and tactics. To understand these concepts, reflect back on what led to the creation, fielding, and utilization of the battle tank. There has not yet been a perceived necessity for such a weapon system. The first "tanks" were created as breakthrough weapons for trench warfare, something to facilitate the forward advance of infantry (the primary combat unit of the time). Even still, they initially lacked practicality, and tactics for proper utilization were essentially nonexistent at that point. In order to design and field a 'mech, a clearly defined, much-needed purpose would need to first be identified. That simply doesn't exist currently. Upon fielding the first tanks, their potential was instantly recognized, though their practicality was significantly lacking. Several design variations were tested (in and out of combat) over many years before innovative features were applied to the basic concept of an armored unit. The practical implementation of a turret forever solidified what we now recognize as a practical battle tank. Even if a 'mech were to be produced and implemented (again, to fulfill a military necessity), it would Very Likely require extensive refinement and design revision before becoming even remotely practical to be implemented on a scale that matches, let alone exceeds, other weapons systems. Finally, with a weapon system somewhat resembling a modern (and practical) tank, the tactics needed to implement said system effectively needed to be developed. C3 was largely an afterthought prior to the mass implementation of radio-directed commands and solid tactical training. Accompanying this training, came a refocusing of the tank's tactical use. No longer was it a breakthrough weapon to support infantry, but an independent weapon system that could be used against a variety of targets and objectives. Accounting for this critical factor, the battle tank became the weapon of war we know so well today. It wouldn't be enough to simply build and field a battlemech in combat; in order to justify its military application, tactics would have to be created to make use of its strengths and counter its weaknesses. There's no guarantee that a tactical purpose would be met over the longterm, even if an initial necessity was identified and a practical design evolved to meet that need. Just look at the Battleship, a very capable weapon system in its day largely used as a deterrent. With the advent of airpower and nuclear weapons, Battleships lost much of their military appeal (granted this is focusing more on the strategic/national, and not the tactical, level, the analog is still applicable). As such, the object that what was once a symbol of global strength fell out of favor by every national power, and is no longer fielded. This would Very Likely be the case of a 'mech were it to ever see use in the first place. So, yeah, really short answer: we can't justify the current or sustained use of a giant death-robot.

mechs shouldn't be super huge maybe like 15 ft.- 20ft. they would be best in urban environments with close air support

I doubt it , honestly they are just way to expensive , one well placed rifle shot can cost you millions. And thats on the small 10m or smaller mechs. Honetsly paying 100 soldiers for their life and even their amilies after you die would be cheaper than a single platoon of mechs

I have to agree with you on the combat side of the Applications of the Mech, But how about the applications of small Construction mechs, I would like to hear your opinion on this matter.

A smaller version of a "zoid" is most probable imo. Quadruped, stable, agile. IDK. A battle tiger makes more sense to me than a battle person.

final note, BIG mechs are too heavy to walk, they would almost immediately sink into the ground upon standing. and small mechs offer so little protection that you may as well just use a tank or body armor.

Although the idea of small exoskeleton armor suits is way better, you're basically a walking tank with much less fire power of course. So i guess thats the solution, exoskeleton suit with alot of armor but not alot that it would be slow. Speed is key in warfare and a humanoid mech not large but small is going to be quick on its feet

*sigh* Wanzers never get any credit....

is this your first video?

I’d argue that the mech is not necessarily all that practical, but I would argue “exosuits” are quite viable, a human inside a relatively small(as in smaller than a tank) you could have a single unit about twice the size of a normal person with the firepower of a whole squad! Rocket pods, miniguns, autocannons, grenade launchers, the possibilities are quite tempting. And the problems of the larger scale mech are minimized by the fact that it’s just a suit enhancing already existing mechanisms, our bodies. I think Madox is a good example of what I’m talking about.

Bipedal Platforms are indeed a logistics nightmare if used in the context of Conventional Operations. However, one may wonder if the same is still a problem in a Special Operations scenario. To illustrate, Modern Armored Warfare utilizes mass maneuvers in a specific area of operations and this maneuver's mobility and momentum are imperatively supported by a logistics train that deliver in volume and promptness. However, Mechs, let say in units of four (Lance for Brevity & Mechwarrior terminology), which is a standard fire team in infantry may be tasked deep penetration Hit and Run Missions of Industrial Size Objectives. A Lance, composed of Medium or Light Mechs, may be inserted behind enemy lines to create Havoc and disrupt enemy supply lines provided these Mechs don't rely on fossil fuel to run. An Army or Defense force would not need to manufacture or maintain a large Mech force. A Twenty Lance Mech Regiment supported with on hand spare parts to replace limbs may be used in Support Roles or Special Operations role; for now.

The problem with mechs is simple..They walk. I just can't see mechs having any real implications unless they become so available that we are capable of arming every soldier with a mech..but i think even at that point..we would just have bigger tanks. Like city sized monoliths armed with an overwhelming amount of firepower.

I'm not gonna lie... I spent the first part of the video screaming, "PHYSICS! ECONOMICS! COMMON SENSE!" at the screen. Thanks for making the second part of the video a well-researched explanation of why mechs are a stupid idea. Cool, yes... but stupid.

You missed the point by a mile. Quite simply everything you've said in favor of the mech is mute. Its just a big lumbering target were as a tank is not

Solution? Have a giant mech grab a tank and use it as a gun

Can you use a tank to punch someone? No? *THIS MAKES MECHS SUPERIOR BY DEFINITION!*

Nice little documentary explanation you did there. Really enjoyed it. Mechs would be very vulnerable on the battlefield in all spectrum of warfare. Though I still want my Marauder! One thing I would like to say, hopefully it hasn't been mentioned a dozen times, grousers for tank tracks are actually like tire chains. They stick out a little more then the pads and press into the icy ground for traction. You only place a grouser alternatively every so many shoe.

I think mech won't replace tank... but works well as a Heavy Assault infantry and support (example: Carry heavy loads or clearing obstacle)

Giant mechs like titan fall mechs would be bad. Standing up so high can make them easy targets.

You mean... Is not practical *yet* . All the problems you mentioned may be considered a challenge for the engineers of today or tomorrow... On the fictional side, Battletech also treats this limitations... In their books, the recoil, the silhouette, the multitasking, ammo problems, energy... All of that, Battlemechs still have problems in some scenarios dealing with conventional units, like tanks, aircrafts, boats, and can be seriously damaged or even destroyed if the Mechwarrior is not careful.

Finally. I get tired of the mech fan boys refusing to acknowledge the shortcomings of a mech. I could see something like the mech from Avatar, but everything else, so far as I've seen, is impractical. Now I could see something like a mech replace the self propelled gun as it would be able to navigate harsh terrain and deploy long range artillery or mortar systems in unpredictable locations, but as far as replacing an MBT, it would be extremely redundant. The future of mechanized warfare will consist of an MBT/APC crossover capable of deploying powered armor troops. The disadvantages of the MBT are it's shortcomings in urban combat, but if an MBT could deploy and extract infantry in power armor on the fly, that would make for a formidable and highly combat effective unit in urban environments which is pivotal considering next generation warfare will likely be, almost entirely, urban. Mechs are dope, but absurdly impractical.

The good example of the mech and pilot is the Titanfall Universe. Mech can be a problem, but the bigger problem is up to the pilot. You can clearly see that Titan are much more mobile and agile than many other mech, even top the TSF mech from Muv-Luv universe. The 2 only mech that can top the mobility than Titan are Mobile suit (fucking Gundam ofcourse) and Variables Fighter from Macross series. The Pilot of the Titanfall universe act as a perfect example of "How all Mech's Pilot should be." There sheer strength, reflex and movement has to be trained like hell. These kind of heavy training to obtain the "Combat Certificate" for Titan's pilot further enhanced there ability to piloting there own Titan. In the lore, only 2% of the pilot candidate has graduated to be a pilot. One of their test were to have the candidate do a 20 km run and continue shooting the R97 SMG in full auto and have to control the bullet spread of 25 cm at 25 range. That's how all pilot should be. Not in like many other series that once you're not in cockpit, you're pretty much useless.

Really good video, but I think one should not give up on mechs yet - not until there's at least 30 years of use & evolution ( like the tanks had from their creation up to WW2, where they were utilized to the fullest ). Some problems, like the unconfortable ride could be solved by either some sort of softening gyro-cabin for the pilot or the mech having two modes of transportation; one with its bipedal ( or qudrupedal ) legs for slow ( like... up to 20km/h max speed ) and tracks/wheels for higher velocities. The transportation issue could be solved partially by those wheels/tracks as well, but it would also have to include some sort of compact position ( like i.e. on it's knees/hurled down on tracks or something like that ). What I'm talking about are mechs up to 5m max, which would be that heavy, although there would have to be an excessive testing stage for reliable, stable and practical designs. Overall I think it is flawed to compare mechs to tanks ( mechs being the next 'evolution' of a tank ). On an actually battelfield there would be use of both of them, but I think the area and type of operation mechs & tanks would differ as they would have different roles. I can imagine mechs would be capable in guarding outposts and areas or in/on the hills/mountain regions. As for them being vunerable to bigger calibre shots, like a shell fired from a tank => I don't think that any military would send these expensive things on the battlefield without any form of active/passive defense...

Random thought here, when you were explaining the cube law of mass, I was thinking that may explain why T-Rex has such small arms

....uhh, no! Mechs would actually be worse than tanks in most circumstances.

“Why doesn’t the military have mechs?” Me: because there fucking hard as shit to build lol

4:33 Tanks can dig themselves in with the right equipment, see this one for example: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-fARGfVA7Mm8.html&t=163

Unless I'm mistaken, the one subject you did NOT cover, is how easily mech's would be targeted by aircraft and their missiles, guns and smart, (gps guided), bombs. ....Both jets and helicopters. So... Realistically, no. Mech's will not replace tanks. But I do agree that we might see individual troops equipped with power armor. Also, you can't apply mechanical physics to organic physics in regards to how much weight an organic giant would weigh. Look at dinosaurs and their bone and muscle structures. All of that being said, I do feel that this was, (for the most part), a well thought out video.

Rather then use mechs with arms,what about *give Tanks some arms?*

Why wont you just make a exo suit ish mech that has more fire power and is about 4 meters tall

What about "Armour Core" series, "Chrome Hound". The mech dont have to have human legs.

Last comment (currently) 😭

Great video, thank you. Any chance of doing on one smaller mechs; something like Planetside2's MAXs or MechWarrior's Elementals?

Short answers: no Long answers: HELL no Thanks!

Why replace? Combined arms, make use of the strengths of each, where appropriate. Tanks are faster on flat ground, simpler to produce and use, and easier to maintain. Mechs can use ground that would founder a tank, have a higher angle of view, and I would assume a wider variety of weapons options. Don't deny yourself a potential weapon, by automatically calling one better than the other and disregarding the advantages both offer.

Agreed. Large mechs are very impractical. But once smaller power sources become available, something like Tony Stark's ironman suit is a very good idea. Although, flying is probably not going to be very realistic for a long time. But giving our squishy bodies some protection and enhancing our limited strength with a powered suit is a very good idea. Although smaller and lighter is likely better. So maybe more like Black Panther than Ironman. But all of this requires tech that isn't ready for primetime yet. With existing technology, tanks and other armored vehicles make more sense.

Battlemechs have many technical and tactical flaws to be considered the ultimate weapon. Even in the battletech universe tanks and armored vehicles are widely used by that reason.

Mechs and bipedal stuff isnt really that practical. Ai and drone versions of shit we already have though is guarenteed.

I’d love to see an analysis of a hybrid mech-tank like the one in Advanced Warfare. Treads for smooth terrain, “legs” for rough.

Mechs are only going to be used as a infantry unit not a replacement tank. We are currently working on exoskeletons which would be a human sized mech suit . Think Fallout 4 meets halo or mass effect.

Gasaraki probably has the best mix that would actually fit in real-world situation

Battletech HAS tanks and powered armored supersoldiers aka Elementals already! So using it with such a title is already a huge WTF moment.