>>23310344
it depends on the mobile suit
with vehicles there's a general rule that the rear and top armor are less thick for efficiency reasons, and that's one of the main reasons drone strikes are effective on tanks
it's not known if this also applies to mobile suits but you could make plausible arguments for similar weakspots:
- areas with motor joints are necessarily thin so they have space to contain said joints. i'm talking less about shoulder armor and more about the areas around it, like where the shoulder blades would be on a human
- areas that present a small profile may be thin since they're unlikely to be hit. again, the top of the torso seems to be a likely candidate as they're small and not often seen in ground combat (this may differ for space combat conditions)
- very debateably, cockpit hatches and surrounding areas might be thin since they'd need space for components and might be made thinner to make escaping less of a pain in the ass. the art that
>>23310320 and
>>23310373 mentions was targeting a ground gundam, which has a cockpit hatch on the upper torso (instead of the usual lower torso/stomach hatch) which nearly has display monitors on every surface under the cockpit hatch
>>23310576
i'll let you know if i run into it i have been looking for it for months
