Jump to content

cool breeze

Members
  • Content Count

    985
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About cool breeze

  • Rank
    Senior Member Extreme (Grande Wizzard)
  • Birthday 04/15/1986

Contact Methods

  • AIM
    zamuel42

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location:
    San Jose CA

Converted

  • Location
    San Jose
  • Occupation
    Inventor and budding entrepreneur , This is my only invention I dont like.

Recent Profile Visitors

1,393 profile views
  1. Ok there s one of em in theater we need em in -game STAT!
  2. I think that if BFC does ever change the artillery/tank and especially airburst/tank relationship, at this point they probably owe HerrTom a line in the credits and at least a free copy of the next game Its amazing how close your results were to the test.
  3. All this work you guys have been doing is SO impressive!! Thanks!
  4. That about matches my intuition on it. I imagine your already on it but I'd love to see the penetration estimates on those big fragments.
  5. Thanks for the amazing work HerrTom. Sorry for being a jerk CptMiller, was just having a rough day didn't mean to take it out on you.
  6. I read it but you still never read the graphs that showed a lot of fragments having much more penetrative power than 50 cal
  7. If shell fragments were only a 10th the speed of bullets they wouldn't be a real weapon. The fact that you got it so wrong shows you have not much idea about HE, and reflexively read things you read wrongly to back up the idea that tanks are immune to fragments. Momentum goes up linearly with speed so the factor of x15 you missed the speed by mean you get 1/15 accurate momentum. But energy goes up with velocity squared. So your energy would be 1/(15^2) of true energy or 1/225th
  8. Have you noticed yet that you tend to read stuff that doesn't say things are protected against fragments as saying they are protected?
  9. I imagine that kind of thing when combined with Russian fire finding radar would put quite the hurt on our own shorter ranger artillery, any time we tried shooting it within 50 km of their big guns.
  10. Honestly, you're fitting right in here and I am quite glad you joined us. I want all the new kit for added too. I agree that those turreted up Kraz seem to add a lot of combat power compared to the UAZ. It seems to me that the people who are giving you a hard time or razzing you or whatever are maybe a little missing your point. it doesnt seem to me you are saying you think the UKR is a more powerful overall army, numbers and size factored in, compared to Russia, but that they have done enough lately upgrading the army they have, that per man its as or better equipped than Russia. Now I d
  11. That thing looks awesome, would definitely use it.
  12. That data dump on artillery tests JK gave a couple pages back was really good and explained/showed that stuff
  13. While not the only thing infantry are good for, I think being there to make stuff shoot is actually one of their important roles. A tank attack can simply be sat out in the basements if there aren't infantry supporting the attack.
  14. Wasn't expecting you to respond to me since I'm not saying anything contrary to what you are saying. your test matches my experience, that the only way to reliably kill an Abrams with artillery in the game is to hit it on the roof with the 203. Still worth shooting 155 at it, but mostly just cause its such a huge threat that anything that might help should go in. Some of that binary experience might be about the player experience vs testing in hotseat. when its the other guys tank thats taken dmg its not so much the subsystem damage you notice at the end of the game AAR, but wh
×
×
  • Create New...