Jump to content

Russians Underpowered, US Overpowered in CMBS?


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 316
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Fast and dirty because I can tell you're agenda posting and I'd have a better chance of meeting and kissing Putin than getting the point to you:

1) "No certain information" is still better than "no information." If you're going to drag the conversation into the mud about classified specs than why even have a modern game to begin with - we don't know anything for certain! :D

2) Russia outproducing Ukraine is immaterial to this discussion. Stating the obvious still doesn't establish that Armatas should be in game.

3) Having the Armatas and being able to field the Armatas are two very different things. Even if we give the Federation's forces the benefit of the doubt with their claim that 2300 will be in service by 2020 the key number here is 2020. They can have 200 sitting on the parade ground right this minute, in 2017, but do they have the men trained on an entirely new chassis to an acceptable degree? Do they have the logistical establishment to sustain them in theater? What's the mechanical differences, what are the in-field first echelon maintenance differences?  Too many "?" to presume that their deployment would be significant or effective. History teaches us what happens when you rush in barely tested vehicles with no 'tail' and poorly familiarized crews :) Ultimately this all goes back to the fact that we know nothing substantial about the Armata and that alone should prevent its inclusion in a game that prides itself as an accurate simulation.

4) Russia has a significant tech adv. in game over the Ukraine as it is. What's your point? The OPLOT is a good, sexy tank but its a peer opponent to the AM, not objectively superior. The UKR have two pieces of new equipment and are in relative terms dumb, deaf and blind to a Russian Battalion Tactical Group.

 

Edited by Rinaldi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Rinaldi said:

Ultimately this all goes back to the fact that we know nothing substantial about the Armata and that alone should prevent its inclusion in a game that prides itself as an accurate simulation.

And what you personally know about, for exampe Oplot? And again there are already at least 20 Armatas, and only 5 to 10 Oplots... I think, that even this make T-14 rihgt to be in CM (very expensive ofcourse)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That the OPLOT is essentially a T80 with French-style (but locally produced) Optics? There's much more information floating around that can be extrapolated. There are 10 with the Ukranians, more abroad. I can read Wikipedia too ;).

You are welcome to dream about the inclusion of the Armata, of course. Dreams, I suspect, are what they will remain. I'm not going to be repeating myself, my point has been made.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a person who worked as a tanker for some time, and now dangerously floats around the Intel world, I can tell you the T-14 in service in the near future is discussed in the same sort of verbiage reserved for a rapid return of Crimea to the Ukraine. 

Russia is spending a lot of time and money on the T-90 and T-72 which is suspicious given that we are supposed to be up to 2300+ Armatas by 2020. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Artkin said:

How wrong is it to assume they would be ready for deployment after being in production for two years now?

That nails it right there it is decidedly not in production more like prototype stage to allow for evaluation. Honestly no one really knows if the prototypes that are driving around are actually fully functional / complete yet they certainly have not been deployed to a unit yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Rinaldi said:

That the OPLOT is essentially a T80 with French-style (but locally produced) Optics? There's much more information floating around that can be extrapolated. There are 10 with the Ukranians, more abroad. I can read Wikipedia too ;).

You are welcome to dream about the inclusion of the Armata, of course. Dreams, I suspect, are what they will remain. I'm not going to be repeating myself, my point has been made.

there is nothing in Armata equiment, wich characteristics is totally unknown and\or secret. And one more question: why there IS M1A2 Sep2 with functions, that it haven`t (first of all- LWR), but T-14 is somehow restricted... why both sides cant have a bit "fictional" (if you think that Armata is more fictional than Oplot, so be it, I don`t whant to argue with you about that cause it`s useless to change your mind about that, even if it is totally wrong) top tanks? Why there can`t be options for recent M1A2 and Armata and RALISTIC M1A2 and T-90\72?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well how about the T90AM's?

My point is, everything is secretive. We dont know jack about most mbts and most apcs. No clue how many AM's if theyre ready to be fielded etc... There are scarce propaganda videos floating around sure. And this is primarily where most of us get our information from (Web articles included). BF made assumptions on the vehicles and their potential. 

We definitely dont know how Russian tanks perform. T90A's have never seen real combat besides in Syria lately AFAIK. T90AM's are questionable altogether, and nearly falls in the same category as the Armata.

I understand Oplot is simply an upgrade package, and that it would be quicker to produce. And would be quicker for crewmen to get used to the vehicle... As is the AM. 

However we are in understanding that this future conflict will bring fourth the highest tech from each side. I'm sure it wouldn't take so long to field at least a company of trained crewmen to operate the 20 or so Armatas we know about. 

Also, even if Russia builds a fraction of these 2300 planned tanks by June (When BS starts), they will have enough to field at least a battalion of 31 vehicles. I doubt they will hit 2k vehicles by 2020 as well, but I don't doubt they will build plenty in this decent time span until then.

Edited by Artkin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Artkin said:

My point is, everything is secretive. We dont know jack about most mbts and most apcs. No clue how many AM's if theyre ready to be fielded etc... There are scarce propaganda videos floating around sure. And this is primarily where most of us get our information from (Web articles included). BF made assumptions on the vehicles and their potential. 

We definitely dont know how Russian tanks perform. T90A's have never seen real combat besides in Syria lately AFAIK. T90AM's are questionable altogether, and nearly falls in the same category as the Armata.

I actually could say the same about every(!!!) US unit in BS, because I can`t really say where is pure propaganda and where is real combat performace.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Sorrow_Knight said:

(if you think that Armata is more fictional than Oplot, so be it, I don`t whant to argue with you about that cause it`s useless to change your mind about that, even if it is totally wrong) top tanks? Why there can`t be options for recent M1A2 and Armata and RALISTIC M1A2 and T-90\72?

I do, and I'm not. The idea of NG units not at the same state of readiness as the units depicted in game is wholly agreeable to myself and many others, I'm sure we'll see second-line M1A2s with the next module.

That being said: If you think the addition of bolted on ERA, LWR and off-the-shelf APS (which the US can pick like a godamn buffet from several of its allies) is in anyway comparable to the addition of a full modernization of the T90 that may or may not be in universal or even predominant service (hint: Its not & this is common knowledge) along with the inclusion of a Chassis that, to the best of everyone's knowledge, is not past testing, than you are tilting at windmills. Green man go home.

22 minutes ago, Artkin said:

Well how about the T90AM's?

 

What about them? Myself and several others, including Steve if memory serves, have already noted that they are a concession granted to the Russian player. They already are a stretch, as you yourself noted. They were a feasible stretch when development started, in 2009, for a game set in 2017. Nothing more to say on that. You disagree with the dev team, that much is evident, but the dev team ultimately has say in the design direction of their game. The ultimate response is to not purchase their games if it is too disagreeable for someone. I suspect it really isn't a deal-breaker for you.

22 minutes ago, Artkin said:

 

My point is, everything is secretive. We dont know jack about most mbts and most apcs. No clue how many AM's if theyre ready to be fielded etc... There are scarce propaganda videos floating around sure. And this is primarily where most of us get our information from (Web articles included). BF made assumptions on the vehicles and their potential. 

 

I've already addressed this. As I said, I won't be repeating myself.

22 minutes ago, Artkin said:

 

Also, even if Russia builds a fraction of these 2300 planned tanks by June (When BS starts)

Even if they build a fraction by June 2017 this still does not address the secondary and tertiary factors discussed. Run-up to combat readiness in this day and age is a very complicated thing that only magnifies as chassis get more complicated. @IanL  and @panzersaurkrautwerfer have already re-iterated my other concerns.

I understand your concerns, I don't think they are irrelevant, but the solution put forth by yourself and others is silly. Ultimately, Battlefront can only work with what the Russian constant-readiness units give them.

Edited by Rinaldi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Rinaldi said:

I do, and I'm not.

If you think the addition of bolted on ERA and LWR and off the shelf APS is in anyway comparable to the addition of a full modernization of the T90 that may or may not be in universal service (hint: Its not) along with the inclusion of a Chassis that, to the best of everyone's knowledge, is not in active service, than you are tilting at windmills. Green man go home.

 

I ask once more- why in game there is restricted Russian tank built in quite big numbers (at least half of batallion) in 2016-17, but implemented US tank that will probably be in service in... 2025 or even later? 

Actually I`m not interested in any new toys like T-14 and others, but if there is no of them, M1A2 shoud be stripped down to it`s REAL state of 2015-2017, without it well =) I will continue to insist on T-14, T-15, and both BMP and APC on Kurganets-25 base. =)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Big numbers"

"Half a battalion"

We're operating on different scales here, evidently, lmao. That's practically insignificant for a full spectrum brush-up between a few brigades, let alone a full shooting-war between a NATO expeditionary force and a Russian tank army.

The M1A2 is in service, all its current in-game capabilities can be bolted-on by first-echelon maintenance crews. You are being obtuse and deliberately so.

The AM is a concession and you vastly over-estimate their proliferation. This conversation is done. I had been enjoying it but you have little to add past some whigning, which is unfortunate.

Edited by Rinaldi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I agree the US can buy up goodies for their tanks whenever, I disagree that we assume Trophy and a LWR are implemented properly. Those as well will require testing I'm sure. Trophy more so than the LWR. 

The Armata is something that could be on the fence with being added in. Commodity or not. There's nothing wrong with diversity even if it's an one off item like the Sturmtiger. A tank that could go toe to toe with an Abrams is something to be desired by at least myself. In terms of commodities, every faction has quite a bit. So it's not like it's an outrageous request. 

Assuming I know I'm disagreeing with the devs and suggesting I stop purchasing their games is childish. Did I once say I was going to boycott their games over one little thing I'd like to see added? Grow up. 

As for the rest, my points have already been stated. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd love to see the 20 or whatever tester Armata end up in CMBS.  Its a game, easy to justify it, and it doesn't seem far fetched to me.

Edited by cool breeze
Edit to add, but of course they'd have high price and higher/highest rarity in quick battles
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Sorrow_Knight said:

I ask once more- why in game there is restricted Russian tank built in quite big numbers (at least half of batallion) in 2016-17, but implemented US tank that will probably be in service in... 2025 or even later? 

Actually I`m not interested in any new toys like T-14 and others, but if there is no of them, M1A2 shoud be stripped down to it`s REAL state of 2015-2017, without it well =) I will continue to insist on T-14, T-15, and both BMP and APC on Kurganets-25 base. =)

Since you asked, I will answer. Its quite simple. 

America has a tank in game that is a modestly upgraded M1A2SEPv2. This is a tank that actually exists, in large numbers. The upgrades to the tank in game are largely just fluff, such as the APS, ERA, and LWR. The armor, fire controls, sensors, and ammo are all IN SERVICE. As these are the factors that decide how it will perform vs a T-90, little would change by making it a pure IRL SEPv2.

Furthermore, if you want to strip down the Abrams to the SEPv2 by all means do so. I fully expect that the Russians should be equivalently stepped down, since they have received the BULK of the fantasy gear. Fair is fair right? The effect of the fantasy gear in game is FAR more slanted to give the Russians a fighting chance. If we remove it all, the Americans will be MUCH more overpowered than they currently are. 

Lastly your comparison at the end is a horrendous false equivalency. 20 T-14s in prototype stage is NOT equivalent to the extremely prevalent M1A2SEPv2 in US service. Adding some extra gadgets to a common US tank is not the same as adding a entirely unique vehicles to the Russians, especially when it will probably never see the light of day in major service. 

Edited by shift8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, shift8 said:

 I fully expect that the Russians should be equivalently stepped down, since they have received the BULK of the fantasy gear. Fair is fair right?

And question right for you- what Russian gear is so "fantasy", or at least MORE "fantasy, than LWR, APS and ERA on US vehicles (wich is changing performance vs russians)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I mentioned in early replies, will be hard to see plenty number of T-90Ms in real life in 2017, and foreseeable future. I expected 50 in this year, and that is still too many. It has good chance that actual number will be less than that. 

Replacing main cannon is not easy at all like you imagine, it is not like toy model tanks. 2A82 cannon is bigger than 2A46, and this brings lots of problem, many equipments inside the turret are needed to be rearranged. This may bring turret design modification. It would be minor but still not easy & fast task. Plus, Russians claim that their 2A82 cannon will shot different penetrator, which is longer than previous ones. This will require modification in their autoloader. 

Their Malachite NERA is not ready yet, and it is even not sure if the Malachite NERA is already under mass production mode or not. Plus, even though it is under mass production, it is not a cheap armor, and there's good chance that T-90M program will suffer from lack of armor supply. Will they downgrade the armor to Relikt instead of Malachite? I don't know. 

And they are under sequester now. Do they really can upgrade all 400 T-90As to T-90Ms in 2017? That will depends on their plan and budget, but my $1 will be on impossible opinion. 

The only reason we are able to see T-90AM in CMBS is because of BF's "hypothetical story line" balancing. They assumed (in 2014) all-in full scale war between NATO and Russia (in 2017), each side bring their "the best" equipment at 2017 (expected from 2014). That is why we are seeing so many T-90AMs in CMBS, which is fantasy in current real life Russian Army, and LWR + Trophy in SEP v2 as well. If you don't like LWR+Trophy of SEP v2, you need to accept major part of current CMBS Russian army should be removed (including T-90AM), and you will cry out loud about how much the CMBS is the NATO biased game. 

I expect the BF will bring T-90M in next module, and they will keep the T-90AM, based on their "hypothetical story line". It is alternative history. But the rarity price of T-90M will be, and should be expensive than T-90AM. 

 

Edited by exsonic01
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, exsonic01 said:

you need to accept major part of current CMBS Russian army will cut (including T-90AM), and you will cry out loud about how much the CMBS is the NATO biased game. 

And same question to you- What russian equipment is really such "fantasy" as you saying here and shoud be cutted? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, cool breeze said:

I'd love to see the 20 or whatever tester Armata end up in CMBS.  Its a game, easy to justify it, and it doesn't seem far fetched to me.

They're not 20 early production tanks, they're preproduction vehicles. They include hand made components, the ammunition family for the main gun is much the same. There's zero trained crew or maintainers. 

If it was another T-90 model it's a jump, but they're not service vehicles capable of combat deployment. 

 

T-14 remains somewhat doubtful for serial production. I know of no mainline assessments I can talk about that indicate it's something ready for showtime soon.

 

T-90AM issued to troops is also a pipe dream, but it's a lesser pipe dream. 

 

The M1A2 as represented in game is an odd hybrid of stuff being fielded in bulk now, stuff that was reasonable to imagine would be ready in 2017 back in 2014 that is still in the cards, or things that are a few million dollars and shipping time away from being on a tank. 

 

I would 100% buy a DLC that brought the equipment and TOEs up to ground truth.  Futuristic beyond 2014s vision of 2017 though I would likely skip. I hate the future war porn that passes for serious assessments of capabilities, regardless of nationality. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Sorrow_Knight said:

And same question to you- What russian equipment is really such "fantasy" as you saying here and shoud be cutted? 

What I can think right now is BMP-2M and T-90AM. I'm also skeptical about BMP-3M as well, if we really consider reality, at least BMP-3M variant's rarity point should be increased. There will be more if someone extensively search for those data. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

23 minutes ago, Sophist_13 said:

4048292_original.jpg

4044833_original.jpg

4048498_original.jpg

It is BMP-3M with modern sight "SODEMA" (thermal). KMZ is producing them right now.

 

 

Do they have that much ERA / Shtora / Arena BMP-3M variants, which would convince the current rarity point in CMBS? From this point I'm not sure, but I will remain skeptical point of view about it. 

Edited by exsonic01
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, exsonic01 said:

 

Does they have that much ERA / Shtora / Arena BMP-3M variants, which would convince the current rarity point in CMBS? From this point I'm not sure, but I will remain skeptical point of view about it. 

Does US have that much ERA\LWR etc. to convince current rerity point in CMBS for M1\Bradley\Striker???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...