Tanks DLC Feedback

[OMAC 254]

I almost wish Tanks DLC would be released before Tac-Ops so that the latter would include lots of missions using the new tanks!

[dragon01 902]

BIS DLCs are not interdependent. None of them needs the other(s) to run, which is IMO very important. If the new tanks were to be included, they wouldn't be usable, anyway.

[midnightwyvern 1]

I hope the T-14 Armata is accompanied by a next-generation American tank as well.

 

I love the look of the Black Wasp in the Jets DLC, so I'd be excited to see what Bohemia would design for an American tank of comparable era.

[Zygzak191 52]

There aren't any western prototypes of 4th generation tanks, which have been shown though. Only thing I know of that would fit is PL-01, which was only a plywood mockup on CV90 chassis and isn't a MBT, but it would fit NATO, because "stealth".

Btw it would be interesting to see thermal camo as shown in this video: 

 

[midnightwyvern 1]

10 minutes ago, Zygzak191 said:

There aren't any western prototypes of 4th generation tanks, which have been shown though. Only thing I know of that would fit is PL-01, which was only a plywood mockup on CV90 chassis and isn't a MBT, but it would fit NATO, because "stealth".

Btw it would be interesting to see thermal camo as shown in this video: 

 

Well the Black Wasp is an original design that's based on the F-22 and the prototype new F-18 upgrade.  They could easily use a similar style in combination with the current M1A2 to create a new, believable design for a future conflict.

[AveryTheKitty 2626]

Chally 2/M1A3 hybrid?

[Damian90 697]

If I may suggest something for BI Devs.

 

If you guys want some inspiration for potential new MBT for NATO/BLUFOR, here are some suggestions.

 

 

This is modified M1 tank within the CATTB (Components Advanced Technology Test Bed) program, this prototype was nicknamed "Thumper", was armed with bicalliber 120/140mm smoothbore XM291 ATAC (Advanced Tank Cannon) gun (bicalliber means that the gun breech was universal and could accept both 120mm and 140mm barrels and munitions), had new turret with XM91 autoloader in the rear bustle.

 

Here we can see size comparrision of a NATO 140mm APFSDS round and NATO standard 120mm APFSDS round.

 

 Crew was reduced to 3 men, of course additional armament would be a 7.62mm coaxial machine gun and potentially 12.7mm machine gun for commander in some sort of remote cupola mount or remote weapon station/CITV mount of project would ever be finalized.




Or again this modified M1 known as TTB (Tank Test Bed), just like in T-14 the crew was placed in isolated compartment in front of the hull behind a massive front armor. Armament was in unmanned turret, a modified 120mm smoothbore M256 gun + a 7.62mm coaxial machine gun. Autoloader under the turret hold 44 rounds.

 

 

Of course it was a test bed, later on these sights on each side of the hull would be eliminated and a single gunner sight and a single commander sight would be placed on turret itself, perhaps commander would also receive a 12.7mm machine gun in remote weapon station/CITV mount.

At the moment CATTB prototype named "Thumper" is kept in Sierra Army Depot and can be spotted via google maps satelite images, while TTB is kept in Fort Benning and awaits restoration in National Armor and Cavalry Museum.

 

PS. So above examples clearly shown there were NATO 4th genertion MBT test beds, techology demonstrators and prototypes. ;)

[midnightwyvern 1]

6 minutes ago, Damian90 said:

If I may suggest something for BI Devs.

 

If you guys want some inspiration for potential new MBT for NATO/BLUFOR, here are some suggestions.

 

 

This is modified M1 tank within the CATTB (Components Advanced Technology Test Bed) program, this prototype was nicknamed "Thumper", was armed with bicalliber 120/140mm smoothbore XM291 ATAC (Advanced Tank Cannon) gun (bicalliber means that the gun breech was universal and could accept both 120mm and 140mm barrels and munitions), had new turret with autoloader, and crew was reduced to 3 men. Of course additional armament would be a 7.62mm coaxial machine gun and potentially 12.7mm machine gun for commander in some sort of remote cupola mount or remote weapon station/CITV mount of project would ever be finalized.




Or again this modified M1 known as TTB (Tank Test Bed), just like in T-14 the crew was placed in isolated compartment in front of the hull behind a massive front armor. Armament was in unmanned turret, a modified 120mm smoothbore M256 gun + a 7.62mm coaxial machine gun. Autoloader under the turret hold 44 rounds.

 

 

Of course it was a test bed, later on these sights on each side of the hull would be eliminated and a single gunner sight and a single commander sight would be placed on turret itself, perhaps commander would also receive a 12.7mm machine gun in remote weapon station/CITV mount.

At the moment CATTB prototype named "Thumper" is kept in Sierra Army Depot and can be spotted via google maps satelite images, while TTB is kept in Fort Benning and awaits restoration in National Armor and Cavalry Museum.

 

PS. So above examples clearly shown there were NATO 4th genertion MBT test beds, techology demonstrators and prototypes. ;)

Great suggestions!  A combination of these would be really damn cool too drive.

[Damian90 697]

I have some more, for example here is a project from the 90's of the US 55 tons future MBT.

 

 

Or for example German made EGS technology demonstrator, unfortunetaly, it's turret was never completed, only weight simulator was placed there to simulate vehicle weight with real turret.

 

[midnightwyvern 1]

21 minutes ago, Damian90 said:

I have some more, for example here is a project from the 90's of the US 55 tons future MBT.

 

 

Or for example German made EGS technology demonstrator, unfortunetaly, it's turret was never completed, only weight simulator was placed there to simulate vehicle weight with real turret.

 

You've REALLY got me hoping they haven't already finished the so far unknown 3rd vehicle for the DLC.

[Damian90 697]

1 minute ago, midnightwyvern said:

You've REALLY got me hoping they haven't already finished the so far unknown 3rd vehicle for the DLC.

 

Yep, I also hope NATO side gonna get some love, but well, we gonna see. ;)

[x3kj 1247]

ffs stop quoting an entire post with numerous pictures just to write a one liner!

[AveryTheKitty 2626]

1 NATO tank, 1 AAF tank, and 1 CSAT tank for sure. :)

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

I'm hoping the CSAT get a Kurganets with a main Cannon instead of an Armata. I'm a fan of both Armata and Kurganets, but the latter is far sexier, imho. But NATO, maybe a Korean or Japanese Tank. Or perhaps just an Up Armored Patria AMV with main cannon. Or if they really wanted to have fun, the EFV with a main cannon.

[Guest]

51 minutes ago, darksidesixofficial said:

I'm hoping the CSAT get a Kurganets with a main Cannon instead of an Armata. I'm a fan of both Armata and Kurganets, but the latter is far sexier, imho. But NATO, maybe a Korean or Japanese Tank. Or perhaps just an Up Armored Patria AMV with main cannon. Or if they really wanted to have fun, the EFV with a main cannon.

Marksmen was not called Sniper, Jet in not called Plane, and Tank is not called Armoured Vehicles. I would not bet on an EFV/Patria.

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

What I mean is basing a tank off of either. EFV especially, was quite beefy, and could be easily turned into a hard hitting MBT. (in the armaverse, anything is possible, even the babies of an F-22/F-18 relationship)

 

Though idk. Think about it, the T-14 seems to be on the side of a bit of a light tank. It's quite small, fits less crew than other MBT's, and also modular, btw. So with that in mind, the NATO and AAF alternatives, could be similar vehicles, and are likely to be made up by BIS. Except the AAF, it looks to be they're getting real life equivilants with altered names based on what I've seen so far. Though I'm not exactly a tank person, so idk.

 

Also, just because it has wheels or capacity to carry extra troops doesn't make it not a Tank. Example being Stryker MGS and Merkerva tanks, are still tanks.

[Zygzak191 52]

8 minutes ago, darksidesixofficial said:

Though idk. Think about it, the T-14 seems to be on the side of a bit of a light tank. It's quite small, fits less crew than other MBT's, and also modular, btw. So with that in mind, the NATO and AAF alternatives, could be similar vehicles, and are likely to be made up by BIS. Except the AAF, it looks to be they're getting real life equivilants with altered names based on what I've seen so far. Though I'm not exactly a tank person, so idk.

Armata is quite big and very tall [~2.8m (3.3m with mg) compared to 2.2m T-90] for a russian tank. 3 crew members are also normal for tank with autoloader. That doesn't mean NATO or AAF won't get different types of tanks though.

[OMAC 254]

On ‎3‎/‎26‎/‎2017 at 10:55 AM, dragon01 said:

BIS DLCs are not interdependent. None of them needs the other(s) to run, which is IMO very important. If the new tanks were to be included, they wouldn't be usable, anyway.

 

I guess that makes sense, but it certainly is a shame that the TAC-OPS DLC couldn't use any assets from Marksman, Heli, or other DLCs.  That sure limits the usable assets for TAC-OPS.  But I understand that the DLCs couldn't be interdependent from a business/ownership perspective.  Unless the TAC-OPS missions were smart enough to activate DLC assets in missions only if user owned the other DLCs....  But I doubt BI would do that - too much trouble, probably.  ???

[midnightwyvern 1]

9 hours ago, x3kj said:

ffs stop quoting an entire post with numerous pictures just to write a one liner!

Oh, shit.

The other forum I commonly post on condenses Quotes into trees that only expand when clicked on.  I'm not used to this format.

[Damian90 697]

10 hours ago, darksidesixofficial said:

What I mean is basing a tank off of either. EFV especially, was quite beefy, and could be easily turned into a hard hitting MBT. (in the armaverse, anything is possible, even the babies of an F-22/F-18 relationship)

 

Though idk. Think about it, the T-14 seems to be on the side of a bit of a light tank. It's quite small, fits less crew than other MBT's, and also modular, btw. So with that in mind, the NATO and AAF alternatives, could be similar vehicles, and are likely to be made up by BIS. Except the AAF, it looks to be they're getting real life equivilants with altered names based on what I've seen so far. Though I'm not exactly a tank person, so idk.

 

Also, just because it has wheels or capacity to carry extra troops doesn't make it not a Tank. Example being Stryker MGS and Merkerva tanks, are still tanks.

 

Sorry but you are wrong.

T-14 is not light weighting between 48 to 52 metric tons. It is also large vehicle as was said, compared to other Russian vehicles.

As for Stryker MGS, it's not a tank, it's infantry fire support vehicle, lightly armored, it's not intended to be used as MBT or a tank in general.

 

Same with EFV, it could not be modified to be MBT, EFV was lightly armored, amphibious infantry fighting vehicle.

 

To explain it, tanks or MBT's in general are so well protected because of their "dense" design, which means their internal volume is very small so they can fit inside only small crew, weapons, ammo, engines and other components, thanks to which with their heavy weight, they can be very well armored. On the other hand vehicles like EFV might be just as large, but they are lightweight and have huge internal volume to fit also infantry squad besides it's crew and other stuff, because of that their protection levels are pathetic compared to MBT's.

 

In case of Tanks DLC, well new MBT's for each faction would be really great. However some additional variants of already existing vehicles are also possible. For example as already mentioned in this thread by me modification of the IFV-6 Panther APC in to IFV by the use of already existing in the game unmanned turret used on AFV-4 Gorgon for example.

More modifications for existing vehicles are also possible if BI would want to include them.

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

Fair enough. I'm not sure what a Tank DLC could possibly bring to the table aside from improved mechanics and handling, and 3 new vehicles. But I'm gonna go ahead and hope that they try something like Dynamic Loadout for Ground vehicles in that respect. Possibility of changing out armament, turrets, and if they're really dedicated, even Armor packages.

[x3kj 1247]

that would be the trolliest thing BIS could do... call it tank DLC, but since tracked drive model requires work they choose to make all new assetts wheeled apc wannabe MBT... 

15 hours ago, midnightwyvern said:

The other forum I commonly post on condenses Quotes into trees that only expand when clicked on

tbt this forum is a bit "behind the curve" as far as usability and convencience goes... despite the recent updates.

 

20 hours ago, darksidesixofficial said:

Though idk. Think about it, the T-14 seems to be on the side of a bit of a light tank. It's quite small, fits less crew than other MBT's, and also modular, btw. So with that in mind, the NATO and AAF alternatives, could be similar vehicles, and are likely to be made up by BIS. Except the AAF, it looks to be they're getting real life equivilants with altered names based on what I've seen so far. Though I'm not exactly a tank person, so idk.

 

Also, just because it has wheels or capacity to carry extra troops doesn't make it not a Tank. Example being Stryker MGS and Merkerva tanks, are still tanks.

The equivalency argument does not hold, the VTOLs or the attack helicopters in A3 are hardly equivalent in any respect. T-14 is not light or small for a MBT either.

 

I'll also quote wiktionary for you:

Quote

Noun

tank (plural tanks)

[...]

6. An armoured fighting vehicle, armed with a gun in a turret, and moving on caterpillar tracks.

 

[graemeshute 218]

The new light tank for Tanoa

[kbbw123 115]

I think for Nato they will use this baby:

 

 

The Flacon turret on a Chally 1 hull (although I do hope they use their inmagination a bit and atelast use a Chally 2 hull)

 

Its also a unmanned turret and it might fit perfectly with the theme (Armata vs New Falcon)

 

It currently has the L30 120MM smoothbore but maybe that gets updated to the lovly L/55 Smoothbore

 

As fro Greenfor, as they allready have a MBT Revelution I can not think of them getting an updated tank like the armata or something, they usually get the more outdated stuf for their age... Leo 2A4 MBT revelution, Warrior, The SAAB in the jets DLC, the merlin, etc. I think it might be either an upgraded older tank (Thinking something like this)

 

A M-60 with a Abrams turret as the 120S upgrade package for the M-60 included: M1 turret with 120 Smoothbore and upgraded engine and side protection plates

 

Or... something I can't think of...

[sammael 366]

 

from  tank dlc insider