Pešadija

And about the ammo thing, sure the latest 115mm rounds are better than the latest 100mm rounds? I remember, despite the game manual extolling the modernized T-55 in face of the T-62, having always a better performance against Amis in CM:SF with the latter. And since this game is fairly realistic I thought I'd put one and one together...

But, noxnocturnum, tha late nineties-turn of the century were MUUUUUUUUUCH of a different business. Niche and mainstream were toe-to-toe, people were obliged to give solid gameplay since graphics were **** (AVP is scary because of boxy graphics-induced darkness)

Since in Afghanistan the soviets didn't really shoot from the latest intentory, in cma I'll be stuck with T-55, T-62, and variants thereof. That led me to a bit of search. And, the modernized T-55 was more popular than the T-62, pretty much everywhere. And it says, on the wiki, that the main selling point of the T-62 (the first smoothbore gun, and with a 115mm cal at that) was invalidated after the development of new high velocity 100mm rounds. How can a smoothbore gun be beaten by a smaller rifled gun in APFSDS effectiveness? Plus, wasn't the T-62, despite being thinner in certain points (for the turret's adaptation to what was essentially a T-55 body), overall heavier? Surely that's a good thing against insurgent RPGs?

I know, but... really, botched programs from small arms (OICW) to big hardware (unmanned tanks, chrissakes) make me sigh a bit. But back to tanks, I once again need your insight on two soviet tanks, since I plan to order CM Afghanistan soon. Can that be done?

WHAT? That a fact? One of the most preposterous things one could ever do. Exploiting people's depencence of the wiki to toot their horn.

Pretty much, the US army has thrown money away for a lot of shiny experiments, and has performed much better when sticking ti their vast know-how and improving it. The only thing they really need to develop more is UAVs, since modern planes have the gross maneuver limitation of a man piloting them and being vulnerable to the vagaries of G force.

Not in the storming of baghdad, they didn't! Thought we were talking 2003, first impact, when picatinnys were still not king, a tusk was a pachyderm appendix only, and soldiers didn't ride in birdcages, the slat.

I was talking of the pure cityfight, not of the politics (which I know too well).

I mean, whence the ferocious rant about an old phenomenon? Caught a home spy?

Very, very confused here. Little help?

The Tet Offensive and Hue should have taught them. The only reason temporary successes of the Vietcong did not transform into a grave death toll in the urban assaults was because the planning had been rigid, so Charlie did not know what to do after taking several strongpoints, and died in the WW2 Japanese fashion - a bloody yet doomed to failure last stand. So, the FRENCH are now arming what is probably in the next years another candidate for arab hammertime?

Is it so strange that the only response that my mind hammers about ZPBII's claim of dude-kissing is "pics or it didn't happen"?

Eh eh... as always the americans had overestimated the Iraqi threat. Urban combat always was where the greatest damage lay.

They should upgrade them, rather, with better computers for smooth shoot on the move (like a chechnyan veteran said "pieces of **** can't move and shoot, it's the computer or something").

As i understanding, this sidetracking means there will be no clarification whatsoever about flower power? Ouuuuwww.

AH! Not depth! Calibre counts more! You should know that. Hey! M.E. Is wrong, wrong, scientifically and ontologically wrong! WRONG, I tells ya! How's that for a sig, smarty pants? :cool:

Let's unite our effort in inappropriate nagging, then!

Yes. A smooth or sharp turn can make all the difference, especially if the gunner is eyeballing something.

Ah, had not seen right. Well, shouldn't be too hard getting the hang of it.

The steering lever's the one at the left of the marches? So, how's it work? Middle is forward, while back and forth steer left and right? Anyway, THIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIS IS BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAATTTLEEEEEEEEEEEEEFRONNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNT for the 300th post of the thread.

STEERING LEVERS? I thought that was absolutely obsolete stuff. Last I've seen it it was a Bud Spencer movie.

Mmmmh. And what's up with the difficulty? What makes them harder to drive? You activate pedals with your armpits, perhaps?

I know, of course, they can't just lay certain things out for everyone to see. But I'm especially interested in the driver's seat, since I'm practicing to get my driver's licence these days. Wanted to compare, for the day I'll buy a T-72 from tanksforsale.

So yeah, as I thought. The 360° view thing is AWESOME. Every military in the world should make top priority to implement it! Looking at the AS90 SPG now!

So, the seat near is the hatch is obviously the commander's. Is the one on the right the gunner's and the one on the left the loader's?