Thewood1

I totally agree.

Yeah, but unless CM is the ONLY thing you play or do, the i7 is a better choice. I have found that i5 prices vs i7, at least on MSI midrange laptops, isn't that much different. On Arma, the GPU and an i7 can make a difference. Steve has stated multiple times its mostly about CPU raw clock speed.

I think its because sighting has a random factor in it. I have found that sighting is not a solid yes and no every time. There seem to be a bunch of variables, and one of them appears to be a random factor.

Yeah, I thought of Cannae, but didn't want to over do it.

I have an MSI with very similar specs and it runs CM2 large scenarios at highest level with only a few minor hitches here and there. Every other game from DCS to ARMA3 runs almost perfectly on it within reason. The key is cooling. My MSI has a great cooling system that turns the i7 loose at 3.5MHz on boost. It cost be $899 US.

Where is the LOS tool...I didn't know they added that.

I think Little Big Horn might be one where it was mostly KIA...generalizations are usually easy to counter, generally.

I am also pointing out that the hit text provides way more info than any commander or crewman would ever know. If you like all that information, turn them on. If you don't, turn them off. But thinking that having them on for only one side and not the other provides some kind of realism bonus seems odd. And the reasoning of a crewman knowing exactly where every hit on his vehicle happens and its immediate effect is kind of strange to me.

I am saying, in my opinion, BFC should n't wast time on it...marginal value for the effort.

That is exactly I was wondering.

My point is about Black Eagle being a prototype. There was so much hype about it, it has deafened any discussion about new tanks from Russia.

I just went through every link I saw in the first page of google from Jan to just two days ago and all listed 2300 as the final production number. Interestingly, all stated that Armata won't even start reaching combat units until 2017. I thought the original plan was 2016. I assume that they are all sourcing from the same place, but I would have thought eventually I would find a "real" number.

Where are the sources that are providing production numbers. I assume they are in a budget that went through a pretty transparent process.

But you do see the point. All the rubbish about production numbers, massive transports hauling tank around the world, automated tanks, etc. just clouds issues. Black Eagle is a perfect example and PAK FA is becoming one. US defense contractors do the same thing, but people and media in the US and other countries are a hell of a lot more skeptical and willing to point out issues with credibility. Just look at the F-35. There are articles all over the place hammering on it from the initial announcements. Then add in Russia's ongoing dependence on oil and gas to drive its economy and there is a recipe for a heavy amount pf skepticism.

http://www.themoscowtimes.com/opinion/article/putin-can-t-buy-votes-with-tanks-forever/517254.html Found it for you...how's that. It was linked in a Monitor article on the PAK FA http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Europe/2015/0327/Grounded-Russia-s-answer-to-US-next-gen-fighter-hits-the-skids

I already that link in here a couple weeks ago.

Black Eagle and its follow-ons stand out. PAK FA as another example of hype that is now suddenly being backed off. Even the Armata itself. Russia has already backed off the numbers they think they will produce. That is just off the top of my head. There are a slew of naval issues as well.

Its also based on past history on various sites around previous Russian projects.

They might know, but you might not know. There is some stuff you just don't need to know. Look at the status of the tank or the penetration mark.

I heard it can be controlled remotely by the pilot...

When it comes right down to it, if you have an issue with text on enemy AFVs, you should have the same issue with your own. To me, it should be either all on as you sandbox something, or all off if you are actually playing.

There seemed to actually a little skepticism in the article. But it just points out the reason people have been a little cynical about all the Armata claims. Comments like "7-hour deployment" comment just destroy credibility.

A search on iron or difficulty would also give you some info.

It was already stated and linked somewhere in this thread that Russia was cutting back on Armata orders based on financial issues.