russians out-gunned ?

[Miles 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (NZ_Keeper @ Jan. 19 2002,01:14)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Bloody heck the russian missle launcher sucks ass, takes 3 shots to take out a T-80, where as the LAW can do it in two (or was it the T-72)  <span id='postcolor'>

they're the same

[DodgeME 0]

Hmmm seems like tanks in game are a bit crap in AI l think. I can play Rambo with em. Killing a shitload of tanks. Killed with the M60, M1A1 and then with T-72 and T-80. Not much difference than durability. Thay should release the T-80U for the game.

[Charlie_McSheenie 1]

I say give the yanks air superiority (since in real life they'd probably get it quite easily) but give the russian ground superiority through numbers. the hind can still take on every american gunship, so i think adding another would be overkill, whereas giving the russians more volume would allow them superiority on ground. Good balence, and added realism. Ever since the russians beat the german quality with quantity they've used more or less the same tactics, whereas recently we've seen the US and Britain bombing the shite out of everything and putting their troops on babysitting duties (of course not counting the spec ops)

[shadow 6]

I don't see a problem with this 'balance-issue'...

cus the balance is all in the hands of the mission designers.

Just because you got a M113, a Vulcan, a Bradley, a M60 and an Abrams; does'nt mean you HAVE to use everyone of them in all the missions

[Panzer Jaeger 0]

As for penetration of rifle etc.

Trees and sandbags in OPF are much to strong. 7.62mm bullet will go through wood like a hot knife through butter. And 5.56mm bullet changes its course when its fired through bushes.

Another word on the gunships. They are armoured, yes. But Hind has a titanium "tub" where the pilot and the gunner are located. Everything else, nonprotected. Imagine how much would Hind wheigh if it would be all armoured? Probably close to 40 tons... Same thing on Apache AH-64...

[Damage Inc 0]

It's weird that you can shoot through the glass of the AH-1 but not through the glass of the Hind.

[P8ntM98 0]

I think the Russians could use another helicopter like the Ka-50. and about all the BMP and APC armor if you use a couple hundred rounds on a BMP it blows up

[WKK Gimbal 0]

The T80 is close to being as good as the Abrams. In MP I don't mind going against an Abrams in a T80. The BMP is faster than the M113, but has the same armor. The BMP (IMHO) should be a little stronger. Not to mention the BRMD, it's a Skoda in disguise.

[digitalcenturion 20]

Yeah the BRDM-2 should have the KPVD(?) 14,5mm turret mounted machine gun. Then it would be actually usefull.

Not to mention the SA-9 or SAGGER variants... mmm...

[shadow 6]

I remember someone here posted a pic of the BTR-80.

I think it looks nice (don't know any facts about it tho)

What's your opinion of it?

Would be nice to see a new vehicle instead of a modification of an existing one.

[Sweeper 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (caz @ Jan. 17 2002,00:17)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">i always thought the balance lay with america having the better technoligy to combat the soviet numbers

if so....should multiplay games have more units for the soviets and reduce their weapons so they dont have the likes of AT etc

just a thought <span id='postcolor'>

Negative might be in technology but US betted on quality long time ago and Russians on outnumbering.

So US would loose any war cause for the price of one abrams there are at least 2 T-80's

[shadow 6]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Sweeper @ Feb. 12 2002,11:07)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">

So US would loose any war cause for the price of one abrams there are at least 2 T-80's

<span id='postcolor'>

Money is of allmost no importance during a war compared to during peace-time

[Sweeper 0]

.</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">

So US would loose any war cause for the price of one abrams there are at least 2 T-80's

Money is of allmost no importance during  a war compared to during peace-time <span id='postcolor'>

No they count more in a war then you think.

The only expection is that cash get spended without caring in a war.

A good strategy against a Oil dependent nation is to blow up their oil sources, something i guess you have done in OPF shadow cause your speciality is sabotage.

Mine is flying i'm a hell of a pilot but i suck in ground combat

[Sweeper 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">It's weird that you can shoot through the glass of the AH-1 but not through the glass of the Hind.<span id='postcolor'>

You could try here for a answer to your comment:

Serched address

The hind is good.

If the page is not displayed try www.ask.com and search for: Mi-24 then choose result nr 8 from there scroll down and click on the picture showing Mi-24 Hind D.

[shadow 6]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The only expection is that cash get spended without caring in a war.<span id='postcolor'>

That's what I meant to say

And yes, I've completed quite a few sabotage mission, mainly AA-threats and fuel supply trucks

[Wobble 1]

the USSR never had any illusion of beating the US in a man VS man war.. they knew their only hope would be to vastly outnumber the US in men and tanks and aircraft...

so to answer US stuff is in general more advanced, better trained and more powerful than its soviet counterpart, but the soviets have more... who would win in a war? nobody knows.. but the soviet bodycount would be higher.. not that that really matters (or did) to them..

they are like china.. the ways justifies the means.. if to beat the enemy you must outnumber bullets with men.. do it..

the West is alot more consertive about throwing people into the meat grinder.. they want maximum effectiveness from every person/machine, and max surviveability..

look at the T-80 and abrams as an example... bother are tough cookies.. but the T-80 is designed to protect ITSELF.. I.E. if the tank gets disable chances are the crew will die.. the abrams is more gearedto protect the crew.. I.E. outward explosion channeling magazine etc etc.. its made to where if its designed to protect the crew even if the tank is a total loss..

as for whats more important in war? well its not money.. its experenced men.. you asset is good experenced commanders who know their shit.. it doesent matter how much cash you throw if you have a bunch of undertrained idiots working the equiptment.

[Sweeper 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Shadow @ Feb. 12 2002,13:30)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The only expection is that cash get spended without caring in a war.<span id='postcolor'>

That's what I meant to say

And yes, I've completed quite a few sabotage mission, mainly AA-threats and fuel supply trucks <span id='postcolor'>

Have you completed the OPF campaign sabotage mission where you should blow up some tanks???

Not me they nail me all the time &"¤/"%)")&)/=&/"&()"%"#¤

And then nice little Blake comes and yells at me.....

Give me a helo and I'll show Blake. Can I edit campaign missions??

[Charlie_McSheenie 1]

''as for whats more important in war? well its not money.. its experenced men.. you asset is good experenced commanders who know their shit.. it doesent matter how much cash you throw if you have a bunch of undertrained idiots working the equiptment.''

The russians beat arguably the best trained, best equipped and generally best army in the world with a massive army of untrained, under equipped generally poor quality troops in WW2 (more specifically stalingrad).

technology may've changed but fundamental rules still apply. if it russians defending NATO attacking no doubt it'll involve muchos bombing. We've seen that bombing the shite out of the taliban didn't really do much but destabilize the country, and to thoroughly win ground troops were needed. theres not much difference between attacking russia and attacking afghanistan, its just the russians will have much more state of the art equipment and will be able to pose a larger threat to NATO. Despite financial problems i doubt any army would want to take on the russians in an attacking situation, same way no one would want to attack europe/america.

if it were russians attacking then they'd be at a huge disadvantage because of the inevitable NATO air superiority (which is where lack of funding comes into play since the russians probably won't have wave after wave of flankers and hokums). But i think due to sheer numbers they could do a huge amount of damage before they are stopped by all that snazzy stuff we have, arguably more damage than NATO could do if they invaded russia, since there isn't a huge economy based on cities in russia, and there is in europe and america. So potentially russia would cause much more damage. of course attacking europe would do shitloads of damage to its own economy as well.

woops, i went on a bit there

[shadow 6]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Sweeper @ Feb. 12 2002,13:41)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Have you completed the OPF campaign sabotage mission where you should blow up some tanks???

Not me they nail me all the time &"¤/"%)")&)/=&/"&()"%"#¤

And then nice little Blake comes and yells at me.....

Give me a helo and I'll show Blake. Can I edit campaign missions??<span id='postcolor'><span id='postcolor'>

PM me about what mission and I'll help you out to the best of my ability.

Do you use icq? If you do, contact me

[DodgeME 0]

I am sure the Yanks Vs Russian war could trigger WWIII. China joining forces with Russian is my bet with Europe in U.S side.

[Wobble 1]

USSR would be at an instant disadvantage.. the US has much more experence and equiptment in amphib, it would be very very very hard for the russians to get any troops over here, and if they did they would have well armed populace of several billion to deal with too.. and believe me that would be a real probem... chances are the vast majority of fighting would take place in USSR or near..

[Panzer Jaeger 0]

One nation CAN withstand ANY invasion of stronger, better trained, better equipped but poorly motivated nation.

If some nationality has determination to repel any attack, it will do so at any cost. Winter War 1939-1940 (Finland vs. Soviet Union). No one could imagine that Finland would be able to repel that attack, but here we are.

I'm not trying to cause any problems, this is just history.

[Charlie_McSheenie 1]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Wobble @ Feb. 12 2002,18:14)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">USSR would be at an instant disadvantage.. the US has much more experence and equiptment in amphib, it would be very very very hard for the russians to get any troops over here, and if they did they would have well armed populace of several billion to deal with too.. and believe me that would be a real probem... chances are the vast majority of fighting would take place in USSR or near..<span id='postcolor'>

I once saw a russian amphib training type thing, and it culminated in a massive amphib assault. Watching it (my brother has the address but i need to phone him in england to get it) i'd say the russians are pretty formidable in amphib assaults, with all those troops ships that open to let bmps, brdm's and bmds to drive out full speed, which open up to let shitloads of troops out (who seem to have a lot of rpgs and assorted nasty pieces of kit), all with hind chopper support who just rocket the sand dunes and blow the abandoned bunkers (obviously this wasn't real) to shit, and also with a few large planes and choppers flying behind enemy lines (which is no doubt a bad thing, probably dropping more troops). Its from a wierd angle though but it gives a great view down the beach and a good perspective of how fast the russians get up the beach, and also you see the right of screen light up and explode then you see the hinds

its impressive stuff, i must admit though i have only seen this vietnam type thing with those big american amphib tanks (forgot the names). they just get out, stand behind the tanks and walk slowly up the beach as the tanks do the shooting. The russians one the other hand just leg it up the beach shooting, tanks and all, while still having men behind the slower moving tanks and men in the brdms giving machine gun support and firing rpgs all over the shop.

Numbers advantage really.

Considering the vast amount of amphib assault technology the russians thought of during the cold war (like those massive, rocket powered ships that carried 1000 marines for beach assaults) i wouldn't really say they suck ass at amphib assaults. Especially since most russian vehicles are amphib to an extent (T-72's, T-80's with those big snorkel things, plus bmps, bmds, brdms)

[digitalcenturion 20]

Russia may have the largest LCACs in the world, but America still has more of them.

USA is more wealthy=more material can be bought if war brakes out. Like in WW2... then the production of war material was REALLY high. How many bombers did a plant churn out per week?

Russia does not have that kind of extreme production capability...

And i find the tought of a fight fough on american soild to be totally rediciolous. Europe or Asia will be the battleground,

[SpaceAlex 0]

Vulcan is the same as Shilka in the game. I prefer a shilka. Looks deadlier.

As for the choppers. Apache is the best chopper in the game and in the real life. (comparing choppers in the game)

As for the tanks. m1a1 is better in the game, but it's hard to say which tank is better in the real life. T80 is good for close combats and abrams is good for far and close combats. One thing true is that abrams would probably destroy the T80 because abrams can engage it from far distances and T80 can't engage abrams from too far distances.