QUOTE (Blackhand Commando @ Aug 14 2009, 06:16 AM)

I like mechs, much more than tanks, because they look better, and a tank cant make such a hulking terror like a mech on the battlefield. ( but not in the real world, mechs would suck in a real army)
However I think mechs should be in support role (like the Juggernaut Artillery)
In my opinion mechs sux without tanks, sometimes tanks sux without infantry, and infantry ALWAYS needs air support. If you send infantrymen without aircraft, the consequence is usually a heavy causility.
Mechs if designed correctly could have potential in the battlefield, but I like you doubt it, as the complexity of the moving parts and the legs supporting such a heavy body would cause more problems than potential to be used as an effective weapon.
However, I must disagree with your comments of tanks and infantry.
Tanks have more than enough armaments to deal with infantry, with mounted machine guns and coaxial guns as well,
sure they aren't affective as they could be when combined with infantry, but they're not sitting ducks like you suggest.
Next, infantry do not require aircraft, aircraft are completely support and are not a necessity.
Infantry would call in aircraft to take out a hardened target or to eliminate a tank column.
That doesn't mean that infantry would have to call in aircraft whenever they sight a few tanks or some APCs,
nowadays everyone from your standard soldier armed with a Javelin to a highly skilled marksman can take out
or at least cause massive damage to a group of armored vehicles.
In my opinion the everyday grunt is more effective a weapon than a tank column.