antaress73

We were talking more about russian tanks, since their tendency to lase when sneaking up on an M1 alerts it and sometimes end up totally blowing its advantage because the M1 is so quick at reacting and shooting. At short range ( under 500 meters) it should not be a problem, boresight shooting.

Great patch. Reactive armor works

Is Battlefront using Jane's armor and artillery for data ?

Downloading MikeyD !

Here's the T-72B:

The graphic is with the effects of ERA., You substract around 200mm to get protection without Kontakt-5. I dont know for Relikt. This estimate for Kontakt-5's effectiveness in absolute terms was from Fovanov's site. He estimated that it added 200mm of protection against KE and more than that against HEAT. I dont know for Relikt. From what I understand its that Kontakt and relikt disrupt the round, making less ideal for maximum penetration. SO the effect would be different for each round. It decreases penetration. Much less for rounds designed specifically to defeat it, but still an effect. So adding 200mm is a rough estimate and probably not correct but they used that as their basis in Steel beast so you substract 200mm and you get armor thickness without ERA. You have used his numbers in one of your earlier posts: If I used the 150mm number the base armor thickness would be even better.

that's my source: Steel beast Professional Edition. You substract around 200mm to get protection without Kontakt-5. I dont know for Relikt. This estimate was from Fovanov's site. Here's a description of the simulation, it's for military professionnals and is offered to them for training supplement so I dont think their sources are doubtful. http://www.esimgames.com/?page_id=823

With two tanks attacking from behind ? As soon as the abrams is warned that he is lased, he drops smoke . In this case he turns the turret completely , lase back then shoots before the smoke obscure his own vision and before the t-90AM shoots ? The T-90AM is fast on the trigger too. A second between lasing and firing accurately. This behavior is almost robotic from the crew not to mention that the motion of the turret must be violent. How many Gs did they take ? Lol I haven't seen such a situation in my games though . My tanks managed to kill M1s on a regular basis, especially the T-90AMs.

That shouldnt be. Without ERA, the Armor thickness should be at least 610-650mm on the turret without ERA (860mm at most with ERA against KE) . I don't think a rapira can penetrate that much. 450-475 mm at most. Front hull goes from 610mm in the middle to close to 800mm on the corners without ERA. That's against KE. The AT-7 can penetrate 500mm at most. Should not penetrate even without ERA.

The Soviets yes. But anything made in the last ten years is far closer in quality to western stuff than you may believe. Including aircrafts . Much safer is a strong word. Maintenance was the problem in most of the crashes. Mostly third world countries used Russian aircrafts and you know how it goes. Russia in the nineties was close to a third world country too. Now they make cellphones that are highly rated in review sites. The Yotaphone 2. Pretty expensive and high end too. As an example. Much better than the Chinese ones. Are you talking about doubled hulled subs ? It so, it was for increased survivability in case of a torpedo hit. But they were indeed noisier in the day than their western counterparts. Had to do mainly with propeller tech and noise absortion and management tech .

That's simply bad luck, not the norm How couldnt at least one of them get a killing shot off ? from lasing to shooting its 1 second at most for these modern tanks. Even with smoke you still shoot because the other tank doesnt have the time to move enough. How did it happen exactly ? I'm pretty certain that at short distances (500 meters and less), crews are taught not to lase so not to warn the target. Sabot has a very flat trajectory so if the tank fills your reticle you just point and shoot at short distances. This should be implemented in game.

They made DU rounds..

As for Relikt and Kontakt-5 .. I am under the impression that it doesnt stop the round cold or not. It degrades its armor piercing ability so that the armor behind the ERA can stop it. The M829A4 is supposed to defeat Relikt but from what I understand, it's simply designed to be more resistant to the effects of Relikt. At short and normal range, it will probably be not degraded enough so it has a great chance of piercing the armor behind it. At long-range, probably not , and that's a big plus for the Russians if they can close to killing distance. Anyway. The average engagement distance in Europe (including most of Ukraine) is 1000-1200 meters because of LOS and at that distance the M1A2 is vulnerable frontally.

I get regular partial penetrations knocking out the tank or even setting it on fire on the right front turret at 1300 meters in some of the tests i've made. That leaves only the left frontal turret and upper front hull as effective protection at that range.

Defensive for US is easier because of three things: 1-Presently, the ERA bug affects the Russians much more, you wont kill T-90AMs 100% of the time at 3000 meters with Relikt working. M829A4 reduces the effectiveness of relikt yes, at closer range it can defeat it but at 2500-3000 meters, not likely especially with the T-90am armor. Fovanov's numbers are for an old plain vanilla T-90.. Which is a beefed up T-72. When it's fixed, it will make Russian tanks more resilient. The Ukranians will like it even less. 2- You rarely get 3-1 attacker to defender ratios in scenarios, which is a minimum for the russians to achieve for any chance of success because of slightly inferior equipment spotting (sensors) and proficiency. Also lack of lot's of indirect fire and air support for main efforts. 3- if playing against the Russian A.I attacker, it doesnt offer much of a challenge or none at all when it plays anyone, even with triggers and A.I plans. Unless the defending force in the scenario fights against heavy odds.

Without the bug, should the ERA on the US tanks be able to protect its sides against AT-14, AT-13 and AT-10 then ?

My artillery shot three excalibur rounds at a T-72B3 .. two direct hits, weapon mount hit so the gun is knocked out (almost a mission kill) but no hard kill. Maybe they were lucky. It seems they are heading in the direction of fixing this in a patch. The T-90, according to new data, is way more armored on the top than previously thought. SO precision rounds will not kill them on a regular basis anymore. They can be useful as with the M1A2, which is immune to russian precision strikes. But when hit by one it loses most of his sub-systems, optics and if you're moderately lucky the main gun. They could be used in a combined arms way. Shoot precision rounds at them, severely degrade their ability to spot and shoot back, and kill them with another tank or missile system. What would be the odds (percentage wise) of destroying a T-90AM or T-90A at 3000 meters with the M829A4 ? I know it's like 91% at 2000 meters (in game). Btw, one of my BMP-3M penetrated 8 times the side armor of an M1A2 with his 30mm cannon. Impressive. It finished him off with an AT-10 Stabber to the little upper part of the side armor that is not covered by ERA. Another BMP-3M in the same game destroyed another M1A2 with an AT-10 stabber that hit the top turret because the tank was on a very slight slope. I think the lobbing trajectory of the missile and shorter range helped. I was impressed.

alexey, that's very good performance. When playing against the US as the Russians, you need to be very careful and use good tactics. Its an unforgiving opponent.

everyone seems to have much success in killing T-90s with precision rounds. I find they are useful in degrading the tank's system, immobilizing them and the odd weapon hit .. but killing them outright ? not often. Anyway there seems to be disagreement on how thick is the armor on the top of T-90s and T-72B3s. You can destroy T-90AMs at 3000 meters ? Russians, bah.. pushovers like all the rest for some people it seems when playing the US LOL I would not base my jugdment on what would happen in real life on that though.

That Hind costed me at least a squad or two and two BMPs from the quick reaction force (without the squads in them .. I dismounted them as soon as they appeared on the map.

On the Ukrainian ones the missile is not a tandem warhead if i remember correctly...it works against non-era equipped AFVs and sides of MBTs but not much else. The upgraded russian ones have a better missile.

1-3 seconds for older russian tanks and that's enough to pop smoke.. The t-90AM / T-72B3 and m1a2 are too fast with FCS for it to be effective against them. Maybe thé skill of the crew affects things a lot.

It was the same in RT .. The enemy spots better than you do lol .. A buttoned T-34-85 seems to spot better than a buttoned-up T-90 hehehe

In one of my games.. Someone on the second floor of a building in a town shot an RPG at my BMP-2 from 350 meters and missed. The Buttoned up BMP-2 spotted him and ruined his day with 30mm cannon fire. That didnt happen with BMP-2s in CMSF. In another game an unbuttoned T-90A killed an M-1 in a knife fight in some Woods so yeah, thé better SA paid off at close range.

Even if its just hotly contested they are in trouble and losses would be awful and politically unnacceptable.