Jump to content

Kraft

Members
  • Content Count

    132
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Kraft

  • Rank
    Junior Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. armata can be anywhere in the world in less than 7 hours only hato fanboy with malicious intent would hide this crucial fact
  2. someone here who can understand it and thinks it's noteworthy enough for a small summary of what's being said?
  3. Just use light mission it wrecks the tank completely. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/82932123/test%20air%20support.btt
  4. Looks like the Seps are trying to take Marinka
  5. OT As someone with no experience and very little knowledge about this stuff I wondered if someone could tell me if MRAPs like this [short gif of IED] are supposed to withstand that kind of explosion? Throwing 12t into the air sure looks impressive and somewhat unhealthy for the crew but I'm unsure about the actual lethality because it's a Taliban propaganda video and they included other "kicks up lots of dirt" explosions that didn't really damage anything aswell as an RPG attack on one of those things with lots of fancy hot metal flying around but according to wiki the warhead had almost no
  6. somewhat offtopic but is it a bug if a tank is able to drive through a tank that got blown up on a bridge? I'm somewhat annoyed because I thought killing a tank on a small bridge would block it off...atleast to other tanks, welp guess I'm wrong - feature or bug?
  7. Adding pointless fantasy things into the game instead of covering real gaps in the CM lineup like france '40 is a waste of time.
  8. Not if you use a Light mission, Cannons only. Tested this for forest deleate the Stinger if you want AT capability alone. Tested this for open open 1 pass => wrecked tank forest 1-2 attack runs before fully wrecked. That's with 1 plane, not both.
  9. I've not found an article stating Merkel is drawing a line in the sand that if Minsk was violated in any way harsher sanctions would definitely follow, you might've mistaken a quote that did not include Mariupol because that's all I can find including harsher sanctions as a definite. Most of the articles say "no end of sanctions if" and the only sentence I catched including more sanctions with 1 page of google checked is which is not a red line, atleast in the way I translate it. I don't think anyone expects that there will be no clashes during a ceasefire, my understanding is that
  10. Sending arms now to reduce escalation is somewhat contradictory to the diplomatic effort that has so far calmed the fighting down and got the Seps to pull back most of their heavy stuff. I don't see the 2 strategies working together all that well. Steinmeier made it pretty clear in his CSIS speech that if for example Mariupol was to be attacked Minsk II would be dead and that there will not be a Minsk III, meaning a shift in strategy to military means.
  11. They mentioned it in one of the VICE news 'Russian Ghost Army' videos and also (tried to) interview/ed some of them. But your account is - and I'm trying very hard to avoid being pre-judgemental here - somewhat suspicious
×
×
  • Create New...