Grey_Fox

What's in the game may not be the same as what's in real life.

In my experience the T-90AM has superior spotting to the T-72B3, particularly as it has a CITV (Commander Independent Thermal Viewer) system. It also has superior ERA, so is more survivable.

But it isn't 1/5 of the price. A Bradley is ~3.1 million USD, an M1A2 seems to be someplace in the region of 9 million USD. And you sure as hell are not going to get a fully remote-operated, performant IFV for 1/5 the price of an Abrams. I posted a video here not long ago of IFVs crashing into each other which had manned crews. Any remote-operated IFV is going to have **even worse** situational awareness since the crews aren't going to be able to poke their heads out of the vehicle and look around, plus will be susceptible to all manner of EW. Besides - what do you think a small, remote-operated, armoured vehicle which doesn't have any passengers and has all sorts of weapons is called? You can call it a UGV all you want, it's still a tank. Trophy APS is already a part of the SEPv3 programme, so I'm not sure what this sentence is supposed to mean. Since when has any tank ever been able to consistently beat all incoming threats? You created scenarios which are bundled into the CW base game - aren't pretty much all tanks in that time period vulnerable to all anti-tank weaponry? Weren't pretty much all tanks in WW2 vulnerable to most AT weaponry? The way I'm reading this is that you're trying to set an impossible standard - that the only way a tank can be useful is if it's invincible and then declaring victory in the argument because there's no such thing as an invincible wunderwaffe. You even seem to be throwing out the entire concept of combined arms warfare. When has warfare ever been cheap?

There are many things that can kill an APC or IFV that won't kill a tank. If it can kill a tank, of course it's going to kill an APC, and probably a lot harder I'm not saying that APCs and IFVs are obsolete or useless. I'm saying that tanks aren't obsolete or useless. They perform a role that APCs and IFVs can't, which is bringing a whole lot of mobile protected firepower to the field without any compromises made to allow them to carry passengers.

APCs and IFVs will be even more vulnerable than a tank against the same threats. At the very least they'll either have less armour or less weaponry if they want to be able to carry passengers, and most likely they'll have to have less of both.

That sort of loss rate is kinda reasonable for 6 weeks into a peer conflict. Also we don't actually know how badly the Ukrainians have been affected - they've been pretty good at opsec and their citizenry haven't really been broadcasting lost Ukrianian vehicles on the internet.

When panzershreks and bazookas were clapping Shermans and Panthers, was the tank dead? When Israeli tanks were being reamed by Egyptian ATGM teams in 1973, was the tank dead? The "analysis" by a dude who mainly posts gaming footage seems to be you need to use modern equipment on the modern battlefield. Deep.

Thanks, you can get the mods that contain them from the unofficial discord server (linked in video description).

@BFCElvisfor visibility

new clip from my ongoing PBEM versus @Scorpii:

Enough to guarantee a breakthrough with acceptable casualties which allows the attacker to defeat and counterattack or continue into the enemy rear. That ratio can be achieved by using fire support as well, not just boots on the ground.

So you agree that artillery call-in times do get faster with experience. It's possible to get down to a < 1 minute call-in time at the extreme end of the scale. What I've seen and been told, no hard data to back that up.

Same as the other games: faster call-in times, tighter groupings.

It's probably a reskin of an abrams.

Had a bit of fun this evening. Sort-of meme video from an ongoing PBEM versus @Scorpii over on the unofficial CM discord server:

Could have been a sympathetic detonation - there are images of military trucks under cover there, so perhaps it was being used as a munitions depot.

The story with this is that allegedly A couple of Ukrainians soldiers were left behind (presumably after a failed attack?) and a drone was sent to find them. They had taken cover in a crater until nightfall where they were rescued: https://vid.pr0gramm.com/2022/03/18/8e18fb6bc7303f44.mp4

I've just experienced a precision artillery strike penetrate and catastrophically kill one of my T-90As.

It comes out at a week's wages of the median income in Russia.

I did not, because it's a whackjob conspiracy site with who knows what kind of internet security issues.

Linking to a whackjob conspiracy site because you think Fox, as bad as they are, would be worse...

Market exchange rates don't reflect the real cost of the fine in purchasing power terms. While the ruble is nearly worthless outside Russia, it's not as worthless in Russia.

Battalion+ sized stuff, and larger map sizes to allow you to disperse more when needed.

Just goes to show how big a rout the Ukrainians suffered in the south, and how poorly their initial counterattack went.

How many failed air assaults have there actually been? I'm only aware of the Hostomel airfield on Day 1. The Ukrainians claimed to have shot down some IL-76s full of paratroopers in the early days, yet no wreckage has shown up in the weeks since despite the propaganda value that would have.