Your description of scenic and hiking and trails all say mountains to me. That’s my style of camping, off the beaten path so to speak, and I don’t think either the MH or a big FW is ideal for that, they’re simply too big and not designed for off pavement travel. But I go well back in on forest roads whereas the big RV will be restricted to much closer to the pavement. They’d work fine for most national parks where the roads and sites are well developed, though. In short, the more scenic and natural the area the more size becomes a handicap. But that’s not saying you’re prohibited from scenic areas, you’re just limited. Unlike the ocean where you have no above ground obstructions.
I think both a MH and a big FW can go about the same places. I’m not sure capacity is the critical issue, though; I think other factors may be more relevant. JMHO, I think the MH is ideal for basically traveling rather than camping. I.E. a lot of highway travel with short stops. I think the FW would be better for setting up camp and staying for longer periods in one place. Also, I doubt you’re likely to be able to get either vehicle in such remote locations that the lack of resources is critical. For the most part you will be able to dump, refill water, etc. with merely some minor inconvenience.
Also, in campgrounds generator use will be limited. Unfettered use of a generator would require you to be boondocking, alone and away from civilization. Or in a parking lot somewhere, like truck stops, Wal-Marts, etc. Incidentally, there are no dumb questions, but there are sometimes dumb answers. I hope this isn’t one of them.:)
