24 replies to this topic

[anonym_2ZNiJLJL8ln2]

Shellingstar, on 12 December 2018 - 02:11 PM, said:

Stop. Just stop. This is a mobile tank game forum. Nobody here wants to listen to your Pro-Russia rants.

 

It's pro Russian to you because it feels really hurtful to your feelings that these things are all true. Middle East isn't an example of tank performance, it's an example of gross incompetence.

 

Power ratings are determined by the KE developed out of the barrel.

 

If you give a brand name hockey stick to a U-15 boys hockey team and have them fight against international level teams, they are going to get their asses kicked. Blaming the hockey stick isn't the solution. Well, to give credit to U-15 boys hockey teams, they are capable of self reflection; middle east continues to blame the weapons no matter how high tech. Somehow, when you are losing Abrams to a bunch of terrorists armed with very outdated tech, you start to believe that it's not the tanks fault.

That is to say, Israel doesn't need to be super duper good, Israel doesn't even need to be especially good, they just have to be average, and average is enough to toast any almost any Middle Eastern army.

Except for Hellazbollah but they managed to beat Israel...

 

T-62's steel 'training shot' can kill a lot of tanks and pierce like 280 mills at serious ranges. IIRC at 1 km but I'm not sure.

 

 

Soviet tanks weren't bad at all. They were actually so good that the 'capitalist' tanks in this game have to be ahistorically improved and pulled out of the future, while the Soviet models have to be ahistorically gimped. IS-7 (1946?) for example, drives as well as medium tanks IRL, and it's 130mm fires at 7 RPM sustained. T-62's loader can just take shot from the ready rack and reload round in 6 second normally.

3BM3 can nuke poor American tank easily.

As you can imagine that is obviously a balance issue.

 

Meanwhile...

Leopard 1A0 is 1964, enters production in 1965, version with first stabilizer in mid 1970's.

Chieftain (1964) can't handle rapid acceleration without toasting it's engine, also proceeds to get shot up by 3BM8 (1964) from mere T-54's, and buttered by the HEAT shells.

M48's turret can't even stop BR-412B APBC from a D-10T at 1 kilometer. BR-412D would butter that poor UFP across the map.

[Redzone01]

Bah russian tanks until recently were cheap poorly built in mass. Ussr battle strategy was to make quantity over quality. The highly touted T-34 was a big success because of its sloped armor. But the tank was rough mechanically from all accounts. It did not stop the Germans from kicking their rear soo much as slowed them down.

Edited by Redzone01, 24 December 2018 - 05:40 AM.

[aquaman10991]

Oicraftian I just want to point out a few things. First you do realize that we started the Abrams in the 80s if I remember correctly. So you point out how the Soviet tanks can kill tanks within 20 years. Leaving room for improvements because we have made some, the abrams gives your most modern Russian tanks (the tu14 if I remember correctly or t14) to shame. Now I’m not trying to start an arguement but check the stats your using because they can be outdated and unreliable. And finally if all tanks in the game were “historically accurate”, we first off wouldn’t know how both American and Russian would have reacted in combat so it’s reasonable to say either side could have won, or the German maus would just roll over everything either side had because it’s freakin ridonkulous. And something like the tortoise would eventually catch up and slowly but surely murderize the Maus from the rear and the Russian boys head on. And the the mf doom turtle would slowly but surely catch up with the mobile tea factory and have a stalemate that shall last eons.

[anonym_2ZNiJLJL8ln2]

aquaman10991, on 09 January 2019 - 01:31 AM, said:

Oicraftian I just want to point out a few things. First you do realize that we started the Abrams in the 80s if I remember correctly. So you point out how the Soviet tanks can kill tanks within 20 years. Leaving room for improvements because we have made some, the abrams gives your most modern Russian tanks (the tu14 if I remember correctly or t14) to shame. Now I’m not trying to start an arguement but check the stats your using because they can be outdated and unreliable. And finally if all tanks in the game were “historically accurate”, we first off wouldn’t know how both American and Russian would have reacted in combat so it’s reasonable to say either side could have won, or the German maus would just roll over everything either side had because it’s freakin ridonkulous. And something like the tortoise would eventually catch up and slowly but surely murderize the Maus from the rear and the Russian boys head on. And the the mf doom turtle would slowly but surely catch up with the mobile tea factory and have a stalemate that shall last eons.

 

100mm D-54's AP shot, and the D-10T's AP shot, both can pen Maus turret face frontally. The latter would still have enough energy to kill a Pz III after impact.

 

M1 Abrams is from late mid-late 1970's...

 

"At least the Soviets exports lost to weapons within 20 years of the tanks being made. Lol."

At least into quote.

 

lol, Abrams, puts Armata to shame? Abrams was already having a panic attack at the idea of fighting the 1980's Soviet next gen tank projects that would skewer the Abrams through it's best frontal armor.

[Bmj246]

norman1632, on 12 November 2018 - 05:09 AM, said:

 

how dare you insult USA tanks i bite my thumb at you

I agree