cool breeze

I read it but you still never read the graphs that showed a lot of fragments having much more penetrative power than 50 cal

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

Have you noticed yet that you tend to read stuff that doesn't say things are protected against fragments as saying they are protected?

In the last thread about the Stryker you had a lot of people respond to this assertion and explain how you were wrong. Stryker was designed before Iraq, for conventional wars.

I was thinking it would be best probably if we used cups with taunt strings.

oh yeah here it is page 4

You get a couple of 'em in the first mission of the campaign. I don't know about the rest because I haven't finished the first yet. You start with 'em on map holding down the far flanks of your formation. I think no one brought em up because we assumed you knew about em. I kinda brought 'em up indirectly when you were referring to the MGS as if it were the AT Stryker, but I didn't spell out m1134 by name. No harm in not knowing about this stuff because your busy with real life or any other reason, but the reason you got on ignore lists and added people to your ignore list is that you started attacking the people whos real life is working on this stuff. Not a great idea when you don't have the time to read the wikipedia articles. This does seem like about the close but I'm sure that upgunning the Stryker (or m113 ) will remain a discussion in the future.

Wait i can't finish reading all the replies first I just gotta type a response. You just played the new battle pack campaign that had the M1134 in it. It was also in CMSF. I don't know how you didn't know about it.

Makes a lot of sense but I can't help thinking the 30mm Stryker is COOL, and its probably even helpful to have some of 'em. I think the BTR-82 is one of Russia's best IFVs, seems legit to try out our own version. I get that the turret is more of a problem for us than them because of out strategic airlift goals but its besides my point. Oh and I'll add that I think the cannon is a better addition than the ATGM. I don't find IFV's super helpful against tanks no matter what the armament, the Javalins already make the Strykers great vs tanks as is, but more anti-infantry and anti-IFV firepower from the Strykers would sometimes be pretty handy. I don't really feel great about shooting IFV's with the Javalins if I think there might be tanks coming. I do it, but I'd rather shoot 'em at the tanks. Would be nice to take some of 'em out with 30mm.

The MGS isn't the AT Stryker.

OMG Shift* enough with those pics, you cracking me up too hard.

Footballs are also rather slow but accurate when well thrown. The idea that you cant send an object a couple hundred meters meters accurately without also sending it really quickly seems strange for me. People have been doing that for many hundreds of years with arrows. I mean obviously arrows and footballs aren't particularly accurate, and its a lot harder to hit something at range with them than a gun, my point is just that variables can be put against each other until the thing gets on target. Adjusting for wind and having a stable projectile and such.

Mile not miles. Mortars also have long flight times yet supposedly skilled ww2 operators could drop the 60mm "in a bucket".

I lost some gunners the first time I played that mission. Lost em at less than a 200m. Realized I shouldn't have been using the scout strykers like that. Looking at em, the huge camera is the main weapon, not the mg/agl. So I just kept em back on the next try. They still ended up shooting stuff but I kept em safe.

Ok but a pistol at a miles has a long flight time too and I've seen it hit a small target. Honestly you're the one with the extreme position here comparing it to a paintball gun.

There is also man and woman to refer to all of em. Short for mankind and womankind. But youre right, typo and I don't really care, make rather a lot of them as I'm sure you noticed

Mikey D, Really wasn't saying anything contrary to what you are saying. We agree that woman can do a great job serving in combat roles in the military, and that woman shouldn't be drafted. And I did say I didn't fill out my draft paperwork. But national defense is one of the things libertarians are supportive of in my experience. It's one of the few universally approved rolls of government really (among libertarians). Artemis, It has been a long time since I read the book. Was it called selective service? While I didn't think it was only combat sorts of roles when I was reading it I did get the impression it was generally military related stuff. But it's been like decade, I'm probably mistaken. And Jk thanks for keeping it bravely real as always.

I totally get what you're saying JK, with the rights come the responsibilities. Seems fair. I basically see the draft as the one and only exception about this kind of thing. Until men can get pregnant and suffer childbirth, no matter how equal things are they will never be the same and equal for the sexes. Historically, war and draft are a big part of the cuts into the male populace, partly balancing the deaths and suffering woman go through to give birth. Some of our roles in society are about our choices, like what we do for work, but others are not for us to decide. Woman are the only group of people who is responsible for birthing the next generation. That lets the society continue. Along with everything else but that's an essential part. Historically men getting drafted is kind of the man version of that, something they have to do as a group to keep the society going. The real solution to all of this is in Starship Troopers. If/when the USA fails (1000s of years from now ), liberty should rise again like a phoenix; but in the more robust form talked about in the book. Civilians are normal free people with rights but they can't vote. Serving in the military makes you a citizen which let's you vote. Seems to be a fairly limited government that's focused mainly on protecting humanity from the existential threats. If you did it this way you'd have lots of woman soldiers but they would all be volunteers.

Alright I shouldn't have brought up UFC, obviously an optimum level of killer instinct and fighting prowess isn't what is necessary in a draftee army. I always feel a little gross when I bring up evolutionary arguments, but for many many generations, enough to build up some tolerance in the gene pool, the male populace as been rounded up and forced to fight and often die on the battlefield. Male draftee armies arn't the best per man but they have been proven effective. No need to experiment with an untested unproven concept in our most dire hour.

Yeah it does apply penalties, that I have honest been slightly affected by. I never did my draft paperwork because I was gonna volunteer if it was a good war and avoid it if not. But that kept me for getting some student loans and being able to get a job as a postman. Honestly we might really be talking about the same chick, although Id have thought her a bit young for you Her profile said something about being a published erotica author. She was kinda far away tho so I wasnt playing it too careful. definately didnt puposely provoke her particularly, it all came about pretty organically. Her family story led to mine so she was like "wait what?! you dont think woman should be drafted?!" so then I um kept it real with her a little on the subject. A little more gently than here. The real kicker was she called me wrong so I called her wrong back lel.

Hand to hand combat does come up in war sometimes. The UFC comment is about the average level of killer instinct among the sexes. Most of the UFC girl fighters fight like girls. Its been a long time since I followed UFC, but when near the end of it a girl named Cyborg came along, she had the killer instinct and smashed on all the girls who were fighting like girls. Since then I heard shes been de-throned and some other bad ass girls showed her up or something, but whatever your just gonna think I'm sexist. I don't think its sexist to think evolution or god granted the sexes different genes that give them different strengths and weaknesses, and in some rare cases different rolls (pregnancy)(arguably being drafted). I'm all about equal rights. I think its all about the individual and individuals need to be judges by the contents of the character and their actions not their looks or group. But the draft isn't a right, and there is no reason to lose a war or be barely able to recover population after it just to be politically correct.

Right in my super sexist sounding example of how I'd use a both sex draftee army I made it perfectly clear I think woman can be top tier killers. Just like some woman are good UFC fighters. A few. But the exception does not make the rule, and we have all been to high school and met average teenage girls. She wasnt my friend just some rando girl who called herself "hella feminist" on her profile, so I had to check if it was ok that I was a libertarian before continuing I see nothing about the badass Kurd fighting woman being draftees so it totally missed my point.

Personally I'd have draft dodged the Vietnam War, but I'd have volunteered for WW2. I think the same goes for enough of the woman who we'd really want fighting the war. Also staying at home doesn't necessarily mean staying in ones suburban wood house. Heading to the hills is a good way to avoid nukes, and bomb shelters keep a populace fairly safe. The reason we didn't build a lot of bomb shelters during the cold war is MAD.

Of course some girls can throw better than me. They should probably be volunteering if we have a draft. Not fully safe but certainly a lot safer than being a front line combat soldier. I think a future war could get pretty freaken gnarly bad without going strategic nuclear armageddon. And of course you don't want either of your kids drafted. I hope we never have to do another draft. But it should stay an option for the survival of the society; and if that's the reason for it, that's what it should be geared towards.

And MikeyD... I may have known that all along