No T-80UM / T-90 in ArmA? is that smart?

[Mr. AG 0]

I don't see the problem. OFP wasn't balanced, and we never had this problem in OFP. BIS T80 v BIS M1A1? Come on, the T80 never stood a chance there.

Yes, it stood...did you even play the multiplayer ?

There is a big difference between T80 vs M1 and BMP vs M1.

If T-80 could land the first shot and move somewhere then M1 and T80 became balanced. One of players from my clan is really good in tank. M1 is not a problem to bust when in T80 for him.

Now BMP or Shilka or T72 vs M1 is a joke. Too slow reload(T-72) or damage (Shilka) to counter M1. BMP can take M1 out but if M1 finds the BMP, it would take one shot for M1 to kill the BMP.

Hmmmmm ....

As you all know this system already implemented in crCTI.

There are some good and of course bad points about this issue.

First of all, lets make clear that we are talking about this system will show itself in multiplayer, as we know that singleplayer will be made for us not to loose, but to win and have fun (thats why some ppl pay money for BIS!. Other fellas like me (and most of BIs community) see singleplayer as ... hmmm ... nice addon to a game to have some fun alone.

Secondly (to all tank pros as me ... kche kche, ) lets make clear that tank strengh is not a big problem when you have the option to buy cheaper but weaker tank versus one but BIG M1. we just "forget" that the enemy in front of us in M1 has ia better vehicle, becouse we know that tank strengh is only 40% of the battle, other is LANDSCAPE and ability to predict enemy movements when he is out of the radar (behind the hill) and the third ... our finger speed and reaction in ... comandin other AI tanks in our group.

We can fool the m1 and flank him. We can send a "rabbit" t80 in front of his nose just before we ready to flank him and ... when M1 starts reloading after first hit to t80 (and at that moment we have his "square on radar" couse he hit our teammate and we can lock on him even not seing him, and we can shoot him as soon as the turret will be horizontal to the m1 when going uphill) .. We can make 2x t80s and invest in BMP, formate V, loose BMP, kill M1 or even 2 M1s and loose only BMP and maybe 2 injured t80s or one t80 dead another as new...

Or (i think thats one of my top 5 strategies (for plain surface area), thanks to my one firend) ... buy 3 t80s (2000$ each in crCTI = 6000$ form column and go straigh to 2x Abramns (2x4000$ = 8000$. 70% that both abrams will try to hit your first tank (YOU), then turn left/righ (from m1 it will look like, form line) and form V! (try to imagine). Then HALT, hide betwenn another tank (you are still locked by m1) and fun begins. At that moment you will have 2 to your t80 both or one abrams will have 3 hits in total (1 by you 2 others). In most cases standing still M1 (player thinking wtf they r doing?) will miss you while you reformating (from column to V)

And voila ... you have hit bonus. Wosrt scenario you will loose

3 (including yours) tanks and kill both m1s, best scenarion you will have YouR own tank damaged but capable to move (you hided between other groupmate AI on halt and was still able to shoot) 2 T80s down ( - 4000$ and both abrams down ( - 8000$. tragedy (not often) you loose sabot or one side track and cant move.

Ok enought of blah blah ...

What i mean ..

1. We need ALOT better menu for comanding gruop units! Wich we know in Arma will be better then in OFP.

2. Faster responce from AI (smbd says that voice.pbo is a cheat at at some point i agree with them, even though i use it from time to time )

3. "repaired" formations .. we all know that if you loose a tank from formation .. ducks go faster than tanks (waiting for lost tank to get back). This must be somehow repaired. As i lost lots of virtual crCTI money becouse of that crap.

4. Take out crap 3rd Cadet newbie mode! Newbies must learn how to play with tanks as fast as possible!

5. Leave radar red dot till all the crew is dead. White dot ONLY when tank is empty!

6. (Important) posibility to LOCK THE CLOCK (no target). For example ... pointing the target cross (of course i have in mind when siting as com, you damn newbies) to 9 oclcok (lockin air) and gunner ponits turret to that direction and leaves it there!

even if some of these recomendation will be fulfiled we will have hell of a lot of fun playin for example 3x or 2x t72s versus one M1.

I write too much ...

[jakerod 254]

Sorry, but this balanced Clanwar stuff is bullsh..

I just managed to outmaneuver the UBER-ULTRA-Best Tank in the world, the M1A2SEP(on a search & and destroy mission) by Inquisitor and friends with a simpel T-72 from Orcs.

Oh, and I didn't had any air support by choppers or AT-Infantry Squads or APC's with ATGM's...

It's not only the "put two tanks on desert island and look which one survives."

During our CTI "coop" rounds my M1A2SEP has been killed by:

- Tanks(yes, T-72s also)

- APC's with ATGM's

- AT Infantrie with RPG launcher

- Helicopters

- and all above together

You can also USE terrain to stay alive. And all the other tactics used by atank commander..

MfG Lee

Ah what we have here is a person telling us about team matches based on his experiences in playing against AI.  

___

As for the rest the price can balance only so much. While a T-72 can be made to cost only 1/3 of an M1, your enemy can drive one M1 all by himself while you can`t drive 3 T-72s simultaneously and AI controlled ones don`t have an effect against most players in M1. (And you can`t lower T-72 price into infinity or you start to unbalance the price in comparison to light armor and you cant lower light armor prices not to unbalance infantry prices and you can`t push infantry prices down or they become free of charge... Plus you can`t increase the M1 cost into infinity, as that pushes the price of helicopters into the sky meaning they become near absent from games...)

I guess once ArmA comes out a T-90 addon will be in great demand. (And the remarks about artifical balance are uncalled for as a T-90 is stil a very different (in capabilities) machine from an M1 not to mention it is an acctuall existing Russian-made weapon.)

However you can use the two other AI tanks as decoys as you hit the Abrams from an unexpected angle and who knows maybe one of the decoys will score a hit or two.

[Mr. AG 0]

The main problem in MP one big tank versus bunch of small ones is quite fair, but the prbolem in OFP R remained the control of the group.

And i think thats why (in crCTI and in future in ArmA) people complained that it is not FAIR to have bunch of weak tanks versus one M1, becouse they were afraid of comanding theyr group ... and they are right at some point ... comanding in OFP R is quite tricky, you have to KNOW, all those command keys ... for example .. how often u used command: Look SW (command said in clock inradio) or other rare, but usefull commands? And having in mind .. that you can easily make a mistake when rushing to press allthose buttons...

Thats why the comanding inOFP R in battle was a real nightmare and most of the players just ignred that....

And of course delays in responding ... voice.pbo ...

[Heatseeker 0]

Some modern russian equipment with the same BIS quality we have seen so far in the screenshots so far would be really great.

Yep, the NS side looks quite dated .

Like it stands nobody will want to play as NS in a adversarial MP game and that would be a big problem.

Fictitional NS Army from 1982 vs US Army/USMC from 2007 .

The NS army needs modernisation imo.. not only the vehicles but the soldier equipment too imo .

[-BR--Dawnrazor 0]

No T80/T90 in MP i am very sad about that

[InqWiper 0]

Its starting to sound more and more like we know for fact that there are no better tanks for the NS side than the T72. The NS side could have better AT weapons if the M136 AT4 only has one shot and the RPG7(VL/VR?) has 2-4 shots. In WGL the east AT (RPG7-VL) was better than the west AT (AT4/CG) because it had 2 rounds instead of 1 and was I think more powerful than the AT4 and almost as powerful as the CG? Imo that never caused a big balance problem in CTI but I always tried to pick up RPG7VL if I as west. With the armour system in WGL you could quite easily take out and abrams with a T72 by hiding behind a forest next to a road and shoot them in the side as they pass by. The armour is supposed to be improved in ArmA isnt it? Maybe it will be even better than WGL.

[DrBobcat 0]

I haven't a clue how the armor system will be in ArmA but I have no doubt that when going against _AI_, more armor is actually worse than powerful armor. Unless I am playing with a player driver, taking down three T72s with my m1a1 is almost next to impossible unless I play cheaply and unrealistically (hiding behind a building and waiting in a corner, shooting their turrets before they get the chance to fire - for example).

In this game, I would much rather there be no artificial balancing and just pure realism. Since this is an small, communist, island nation, their army size would already be quite small in comparison to those of China, Russia, or even Korea and their technology would be quite low. Also, the Americans are coming from where....? Err - the United States. Their resource capabilities are much, much greater than that of NS so their tech, in comparison, would be much higher as well. We have to take that into consideration.

However, in multiplayer this _can_ be a problem but it comes down more to player skill than technology. A well positioned, hidden and well trained T72 could in fact defeat a M1 in an one on one match. Also, we have to remember that there are mines and anti-tank weaponry. Nothing is impossible if you think critically before acting.

- dRb

P.S. Think of how awesome it would be to get a kill on a M1 anyway.  

[DVD 0]

Inf. AT weapons work in short range, but a tank can kill you in every viewdistance.

ArmA will come with higher VD (more than 1200m - 1500m, what is normally used in OFP for CTI).

Higher VD gives allways the tank the advance.

If i have one M1 and a bunch of sniper in the field vs. a player with 3 T-72 and dont know how much space is left for his AT inf, in ArmA, who has the advance?

I even have more space left to set up a good AA def. with stinger inf. vs. KA50.

Well thing about it...

[InqWiper 0]

Infantry shouldnt walk in open ground when there are tanks about. Infantry is less visible than tanks are so the infantry should have the advantage of spotting the tank before the tank spots them. Infantry can then either use the terrain as concealment and advance towards the tank until they are in range or they may be able to wait for the tank to come to them. Sahrani wont be an open desert so infantry should stand a fair chance against tanks. I would very much hate to drive a tank into a Sahrani city with enemy AT infantry, I much rather be on the AT infantry side.

Quote[/b] ]If i have one M1 and a bunch of sniper in the field vs. a player with  3 T-72 and dont know how much space is left for his AT inf, in ArmA, who has the advance?

If you have snipers in a field I will kill them with a sniper in a forest and when your snipers are dead I can advance AT infantry from another direction and start firing at you from >200 meters. When you start engaging my AT infantry I will bring in 2 T72s, one from either side and then you know never to stand and wait in the middle of a field again  

[martinovic 0]

North Sahrani soldiers already have those american vests so i don't understand why they can't have some T-80s... not hundreds but maybe just a few...

Most servers don't use mods. So if there isn't any T-80 on the eastern side by default then RHS can release as many T-80s as it wants (no offense, i really like those T-80s) the majority of people won't be using those tanks.

[Second 0]

Inf. AT weapons work in short range, but a tank can kill you in every viewdistance.

ArmA will come with higher VD (more than 1200m - 1500m, what is normally used in OFP for CTI).

Higher VD gives allways the tank the advance.

Or i can use AT-missiles which shoot to even 4 kilometers possibility of hit being ~90%. Ever heard of Spike or Javelin or Milan... there are even more of these things in the world. In OFP if using high terraindetail there are always some holes where man can hide and wait for his moment. And what about ArmA's grass?

Go and live in that tank-paradise (plains/desert) if you like, but fortunately ArmA won't be like it compelitely There will always be a hole for AT-guy and his launcher.

[norsu 180]

In this game, I would much rather there be no artificial balancing and just pure realism. Since this is an small, communist, island nation, their army size would already be quite small in comparison to those of China, Russia, or even Korea and their technology would be quite low. Also, the Americans are coming from where....? Err - the United States. Their resource capabilities are much, much greater than that of NS so their tech, in comparison, would be much higher as well. We have to take that into consideration.

NS might be small but however if you look at Cypriot army for example, they have T-80s, BMP-3s, Mi-35s and modern gear for their troops . A modernized T-72 with latest gizmos and ammunition would be fair addition and like it's said before, there doesn't need to be lots of them but just a few in campaign to create more challenge for Abrams crews.

Though I have beaten those two BIS M1A1 tanks with a T-72 in Blake's Band of Comrades mission 2 .

[hoot 0]

Inf. AT weapons work in short range, but a tank can kill you in every viewdistance.

ArmA will come with higher VD (more than 1200m - 1500m, what is normally used in OFP for CTI).

Higher VD gives allways the tank the advance.

Or i can use AT-missiles which shoot to even 4 kilometers possibility of hit being ~90%. Ever heard of Spike or Javelin or Milan... there are even more of these things in the world. In OFP if using high terraindetail there are always some holes where man can hide and wait for his moment. And what about ArmA's grass?

Go and live in that tank-paradise (plains/desert) if you like, but fortunately ArmA won't be like it compelitely There will always be a hole for AT-guy and his launcher.

Some things first: Using the terrain as an infantrymen is quite useless when the target is moving, like a tank typically does, because parking tanks are deemed to be toast, unless it's disguised in position. And if it's disguised the average grunt is simply not able to find it. The fact DVD has stated (the viewdistance) is quite essential, especially for those who are telling how realistic ofp is. With magnification and thermal sights (not implemented in ArmA), a well trained tankcrew is just superior, even its 40°C hot. When we were in Prizren in 1999 our commander-in-chief was attacked by a sniper from a 800-1000m distance on the cirque above the town. It was mostly 35-40°c hot but however, i've used the thermal sights to find that sniper. It was not that easy to find a breathing signature alongside hundreds of hot stones, but finally i've found him. AT Troops would not shoot from that distance because of the frustum view tanks have. It would be more clever to get closer to the tank to use the disadvantages of optics on short ranges.

Even if you think to shoot at a tank and take cover after that hit, the trail of smoke will always reveal your position so you have two shots AT at best. Do you really think that would stop a MBT?! Do you think all the Fire'nForget features in OFP for AT's are real?! Do you think OFP is realistic?! I think yes, but with taking some smear and therefore don't blame DVD that way!

Your dream dude, a dream of infanterymen-superiority, is non-realistic as well as tank-superiority, but a tank is obviously more dangerous and better equipped than infantrymen ever will be in open spaces (Of course not in urban territory like towns, where a 'Wiesel' could do the job quite better). Prior a single infantrymen will set one foot to the battlefield, lots of clean sweeps will be performed from the air - mh do you know why?!

Back to topic: If there will be no counterparts for the commies in the singleplayer campaign, fine (History reminds me, that there was a similar situation with the russians and germans in WWII. The germans were better equipped (in the early years) but the russians had plentiful material what became an big advantage later).

However, there should be a modern tank on the commie side for the multiplayer part, especially for a CTI mode. And if not, it is not that bad. I guess we will see a BW-CTI for ArmA sooner or later, modern MBT's for both sides within.

[USSRsniper 0]

Skill of played doesn't depend? player player vs. player map on tanks and one guy alone owned 3 M1's (all standart stuff without addons) and most of them didn't even see T72 coming or even found it before dying, i was in one of those M1's as driver Why T-72 just killed all the three tanks? because T-72 used tactic, thats why he won. In RL what T72 what aengaged by Armabs? Crapy old versions and crew that drove tractor before...

RPG7 against M1, why not make RPG-29

[hoot 0]

because T-72 used tactic, thats why he won. In RL what T72 what aengaged by Armabs? Crapy old versions and crew that drove tractor before...

RPG7 against M1, why not make RPG-29

True man, but if just one of the M1 crewmember would be trained the same way, that 72 would get perforated on sight Remember OFP? It's often enough to hit the 72's barrel to make it 'black'. Once that happened you can let the 72 move away since it is no hazard anymore. I guess the armour argument was already stated I think we should really differ MP from SP. I'm going off now, for not going round in circles any longer

[Cifu 0]

First of all: i hate the "playability balance". We seen in the OFP: we get Mi-24V's, but not the standard loadout of 4x32 57mm or 4x20 80mm unguided rocket pod + 4 9M114 (AT-6 Spiral) anti-tank missile, but 2 rocket pod and 8 AT missile, to perfectly counterbalance the AH-1W. Bahhh....

Yes, in a war there are no balance. So yes, we need different type of weapons, and yes, this means someone has stronger, and the other are weaker in some field.

But this is a game god damn it, and the players are want to enjoy it, even if the ArmA a simulation. Yes, you can make a mission, when the two side has 1:3 players ratio, and the "west" side has silenced, scoped M4's, M1A1's, night vision, etc., and the "east" side has a plain AK-47 or AK-74, old model T-72's and good ears...

But who choose in this case the "east" side. You can bet, the few. Most of the players are want the scoped M4's, the better M1A1, and the idea of the "unbeatable rambo" style gaming, to slaughter the "east" side players, not because he has better player, but only because he has better gear. Sounds great? Well, not for me...

Why? Well, because the majority of the players in this version of game wont wanna play the "east" side, so if they cannot join the "west" side, simple seek an another server. We see it many times...

I hate the "good old" way of the west vs. east style wargaming. You say "normal" to match M1A1's and T-72's, because this is the "formal" way of the wars? I say this is bullshit. This is an fictional war, so why we copy the Gulf-war?

In the single player mode, this is wont mean any problem. We are the good guys, we are overwhelmed by the kommunist northern army, but we have the better gear, so at least we have the chance to play it rambo-style. But in multi-player... welll...

But no, we dont need T-80UM or T-90S, even the T-72 can be a real nasty opponent for an M1A1, if the "east" side upgrade it. The T-72B(M) has Kontakt-5 ERA, wich capable to stop an M829 APFSDS-DU round fired from an M1A1 MBT (proved in germany test field, 1996). But not only the russian upgrade can do this. The Czech and Slovakian T-72 MBT upgrades (the Slovakian T-72M2, and the Czech T-72M3/M4) use an own made verison of reactive armour, wich at least equally effective against the APFSDS rounds.

The modernized T-72's can fire ATGM's from their 125mm guns. The M1A1 can't (well, not really true, because the Abrams can be upgraded to use the israeli LAHAT missile). So if we want, even the T-72 can be an formadible enemy for the Abrams...

Anyway, the addonmakers, who's keep the OFP in shape even 5 years after the release, can be make good addons, wich help in this problem. But i'm very curious how the BIS want to solve this in the original, not modded ArmA...

[Garcia 0]

And i like it, because i play cti and its boring to play against publics in crap tanks.

And it makes clan matches even more interresting, if both side have a fair chance.

You may have your reasons for your coop missions, to keep this 1:3 balance, but this is nothing for me.

You've obviously missed the fact that the vehicles in CTI usually are heavily modified...at least in MFCTI...

[Second 0]

Your dream dude, a dream of infanterymen-superiority, is non-realistic as well as tank-superiority, but a tank is obviously more dangerous and better equipped than infantrymen ever will be in open spaces (Of course not in urban territory like towns, where a 'Wiesel' could do the job quite better). Prior a single infantrymen will set one foot to the battlefield, lots of clean sweeps will be performed from the air - mh do you know why?!

ArmA/OFP are games and i'm talking about ArmA/OFP (I served in infantry based army, and i say that OFP can't reach even a half of those possibilites that grunt has when it comes to disquising, ArmA is little better with it's grass, but still grunt can't dig-in) But back to ArmA/OFP: Enemy armed with missiles and rocketlaunchers can make tankers finding themselves in deep trouble. This doesn't make infantry man superior, but tanks lose thing that made them superiour when comparing to infantry: protection from long ranges. Milan in operation frenchpoint was killer, simply the best missile system in OFP what i've seen. if i can spot moving enemy armor from 1-2 km (isn't very tricky in OFP) tank, even with player crew, probably won't spot me as i'm smaller target and i can use small bushes as disguise. After two hit M1A1 is in bad shape, someone possibly dead. Can M1A1 hit with it's HEAT me even if it found me? there might be only head and missile tube which tankers can spot at ~1 km? What tank gets in equipments infantry gets in small size and specialization. That scenario of mine is just one thing that can happen, It can be that when i'm preparing missilepositions Some BAS**RD in chopper or IFV spots me and my bals and BOOM

btw. That your thermalthing was one example. Bushes can give good cover from thermals. I've used TOW in dense forrests and we also disguised our TOW and crew from thermals. They aren't supersights, you just have to know how they work (and use them little), and you know how to cover from them. If you are in battlefield you might not have even a minute to search for enemy or your dead. You have to get forward, no time to scan every rock or bush just move-move-move.

[major woody 11]

Would'nt there be a slightly chance that Red Hammer Studios would convert their T80 pack into ARMA?

Can't find better T80's than theese...  

[hoot 0]

Your dream dude, a dream of infanterymen-superiority, is non-realistic as well as tank-superiority, but a tank is obviously more dangerous and better equipped than infantrymen ever will be in open spaces (Of course not in urban territory like towns, where a 'Wiesel' could do the job quite better). Prior a single infantrymen will set one foot to the battlefield, lots of clean sweeps will be performed from the air - mh do you know why?!

ArmA/OFP are games and i'm talking about ArmA/OFP (I served in infantry based army, and i say that OFP can't reach even a half of those possibilites that grunt has when it comes to disquising, ArmA is little better with it's grass, but still grunt can't dig-in) But back to ArmA/OFP: Enemy armed with missiles and rocketlaunchers can make tankers finding themselves in deep trouble. This doesn't make infantry man superior, but tanks lose thing that made them superiour when comparing to infantry: protection from long ranges. Milan in operation frenchpoint was killer, simply the best missile system in OFP what i've seen. if i can spot moving enemy armor from 1-2 km (isn't very tricky in OFP) tank, even with player crew, probably won't spot me as i'm smaller target and i can use small bushes as disguise. After two hit M1A1 is in bad shape, someone possibly dead. Can M1A1 hit with it's HEAT me even if it found me? there might be only head and missile tube which tankers can spot at ~1 km? What tank gets in equipments infantry gets in small size and specialization. That scenario of mine is just one thing that can happen, It can be that when i'm preparing missilepositions Some BAS**RD in chopper or IFV spots me and my bals and BOOM

btw. That your thermalthing was one example. Bushes can give good cover from thermals. I've used TOW in dense forrests and we also disguised our TOW and crew from thermals. They aren't supersights, you just have to know how they work (and use them little), and you know how to cover from them. If you are in battlefield you might not have even a minute to search for enemy or your dead. You have to get forward, no time to scan every rock or bush just move-move-move.

You have used wire guided missiles (like the tow for example) in a dense forrest? I don't want to explain all the tactics tanks have if they were shot at, especially on those distances just because i would tell you tactics that ask for an ideal situation. But you can't simply factor out some facts.

As told, you will propably have 2 shots at best but don't forget that it's mostly unusual to face just one single MBT. Long range attacks on tanks is the same, if you don't have heavy AT's like Javelins for example, then you will have the same prob as described, the trail of smoke, your AT will undoubtedly generate, is your dead, as simple as it is - and in such a situation it won't matter if you hide behind a bush dude, i will simply put some MZ/HEAT to your position.

You tell me things based on OFP which i can prove as beeing non-realistic, so it makes no more sense to talk about AT's, which OFP portrays as fire'n forget which is definetely unrealistic. Try the WGL mod and you will see what i mean. An additional fact known from reality (the blitzkrieg used those tactics at first) is a strategy called combined arms, which combines air-units, mechanized infantry and heavy tanks, so it will be doubtable that you will ever lead an dismounted infantrycompany as tank hunters (Panzerjäger, an arm that has been cancelled in the german army in the mid-90s) in wide open spaces.

If you say that rushing is best to survive a battle and that you have no time to scan, than you are right but that must apply to the inf as well and again, you're telling things apparently starting from one single tank and the most ideal position for infantry. FOV's (Beobachtungsbereiche) anyone?!

Sure infantry has advantages in size and camo, but that makes them not invisible, even if they know to hide from thermal sights. The rules of the battlefield apply to all land-forces. And yes as told, you can easily spot men at 1km. For example, the DM53 ammuntion for the Leopard series increases the attackrange to 4km for KE/APFSDS and DM12 MZ/HEAT has an effective range of 2.6km. It makes no sense to equip tanks with such an ammo, if the gunner can't aim at similar distances.

Play the WGL mod and you will face some realistic problems, the average OFP setup does not have. In OFP with a disabled veteran mode, all that counts is, who has the fastest finger to lock-on. I know these lock-on-parties

But dude, there is no need to argue since it is the old phenomenon with tankcrews and infantrymen. One side often tells how easy it is to let infantrymen crack with 120mm, the other side tells how easy it is to toast a tank. But finally the aircraftcrews will be those who laugh just until aa hits them. What is the result?! Killing people in one way or another is just bs

All you have told about OFP/ArmA is quite right, but my statement was related to 'how realistic ofp is'. In OFP/ArmA AT's are über-weapons, by all means. Sry for the mix-up.

So much for that. I hope that text won't anger Placebo, as it became a bit offtopic now. Sry!

[DVD 0]

And i like it, because i play cti and its boring to play against publics in crap tanks.

And it makes clan matches even more interresting, if both side have a fair chance.

You may have your reasons for your coop missions, to keep this 1:3 balance, but this is nothing for me.

You've obviously missed the fact that the vehicles in CTI usually are heavily modified...at least in MFCTI...

Yes of course, like in my crCTI mods.

BW@DVD

http://cr-ofp.dyndns.org/index.php?view=619

@DVD v2

http://cr-ofp.dyndns.org/index.php?view=655

Lalala... pfff ..

The point is, a lot people dont play with MFCTI or CTITC addons.

Why should it be so hard for Bohemia to insert a T80?

Over and out...

Der verrückte Doktor

[Xanthus 0]

Haven't been around for a few years, but that's an interesting discussion so i'll make a post . Having no T80s in the campaign seems reasonable cause a third world commie country could not afford buying such armor and the west side should be outnumbered which that gives an oportunity for some intense tank battles. But balancing both sides in 10vs10 c&h match seems impossible, cause T72 simply cannot take out an abrams if the tank crew has equal experience. Even if the T72 fired the first shot it was no problem to spot and take it out in ofp while facing equally experienced crew. And you can't simply add 2/3 T72's against single M1A1 in a 10vs10 match cause it leaves no grunts in midfield and with voice comms you could easily take out an abrams simply because of larger nuber. Balancing it in CTI doesn't seem so hard, i never bought the most expensive tanks and had larger number of t72's/m60's instead, if you keep your eyes open superior tanks can be taken out. However i'm confident in BIS and hoping to see some modern modifications of T72's for multiplayer.

[Second 0]

I won't speak about that "dense forrest"-thing either. Still i have to say (if you have doupts about it) that it is designed to fit my country's terrain, to maximize ATGMs killing/survival-ratio. Tank's possibilities in our terrain have been taken in count. And i can assure that best brains have been thinking this and making sure that it works.

this topic has been talk of 1-on-1 match in OFP, from that viewpoint i replied. I'm aware of combined arms, but it can't be properly dicussed in forums, and that is why i left it out.

Quote[/b] ]If you say that rushing is best to survive a battle and that you have no time to scan, than you are right but that must apply to the inf as well and again, you're telling things apparently starting from one single tank and the most ideal position for infantry. FOV's (Beobachtungsbereiche) anyone?!

AS i said that is just example, idea of it was to show that tanks can be killed from long distances in OFP. Rushing/moving is what military uses when in attack. To avoid enemy artillery and attack boggin down, as defender (AT-infantry in this case) has possibility to wait in cover that tank comes to it's area and then it shoots. Tanks are in groups, but so is AT. Both try to kill each of other. AT-units has weapons that are designed to kill tanks as tanks have weapons which are designed to kill almost anything in battlefield (including AT). I merely tried to explain that tank isn't superweapon (as someones seems to think), even in OFP (NATO missiles, like Milan, are heavy. But seems that in OFP is non-speaken rule: M1A1 has to take atleast three hits before destroying, no matter what it hits it). Yes i wouldn't go for tank hunt without proper recon, and backup forces. Tank hunting for individual tank is other case, but against platoon... no way (in OFP).

Trail of smoke isn't very clear and long lasting as missile burns it's travelfuel before it travels 300 meters (this is TOW spec). You might spot missile thou, but that means that you have to look exactly to it same goes with smoketrail.

WGL is too praised for it's realism, that is what i think. It is just OFP with different spices and with little realism boost (but just a little). Milan isn't fire-and-forget missile.

You have good points thou (some which i don't agree, but they are worth of giving thought later) , but we both mix two things: What is reallife thing and what is OFP thing. And we both don't seem to know which of those two other ment. So my sorry too

[Ase290406 0]

Someone wrote here about the Ka-50. It's one of the best combat-choppers in the world. So mabye BIS wants the U.S to have better tanks, and the NS to have the better gunship. In comparison to the AH-1 the Kamov is less stealthy but heavily armoured and even more heavily armed. If the AH-1 relies on stealth (bassicly) the KA-50 is true "assault helicopter". If BIS gives the KA-50 it's real-life weaponary (Sturm/AT-16 supersonic laser guided AT missile) it wiil prove more than a match for the M1A2.

[dmakatra 1]

I don't see the problem. OFP wasn't balanced, and we never had this problem in OFP. BIS T80 v BIS M1A1? Come on, the T80 never stood a chance there.

Yes, it stood...did you even play the multiplayer ?

There is a big difference between T80 vs M1 and BMP vs M1.

If T-80 could land the first shot and move somewhere then M1 and T80 became balanced. One of players from my clan is really good in tank. M1 is not a problem to bust when in T80 for him.

Now BMP or Shilka or T72 vs M1 is a joke. Too slow reload(T-72) or damage (Shilka) to counter M1. BMP can take M1 out but if M1 finds the BMP, it would take one shot for M1 to kill the BMP.

T80 vs M1 wasn't balanced. It was more even than T72 vs M1, but that doesn't make it balanced. But how do we solve that?

By smart mission designing!

Most people seem to have a lot of ideas for features that they want to see in ArmA. The strange thing is that it's already in OFP, just that they haven't got their fat arses out of that telly-couch and learnt how to handle the editor properly.