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

[CsonkaPityu 0]

North Sahrani seems very poorly equipped. Now, no army would field a single type of tank, that would be nonsense. Even poor ex-commie states have several types of tanks left over from the glory days of the USSR. So i really think NS should have a few lesser tanks atleast. If the T-72 is the top of the line tank then fine. But it's a pretty big stretch for any army no matter how underequipped to field a single type of tank. NS should have a few T-55s, T-64s. I mean even iraq was better equipped in the armor department.

Not to mention that the north's APC roster is also pretty under-equipped. Only BMP-2s and BRDMs? I understand it's an island republic but then they should have a naval presence if they don't have a good landbased force and i don't see BIS including capital ships anytime soon, so lets just stick with a beefier groundforce. An old style commie force would have a few MT-LBs - for example - to tow around artillery and supplies into areas where trucks don't go too well (like the mountanous northern region). The MT-LB is pretty versatile in terms of equipment, slap a few ATGMs on that cheap tin-can and it can provide some good AT capabilities to the infantry it was carrying, or it can become an AA battery with anything from ZSU-32-2 to SA-13s, so such an APC would be valuable to a budget army (more then a BMP-2 atleast). Sahrani also seems to have a well developed road network so if i would've been in charge of buying equipment then a few BTR-80s would've been ok, for a faster response force in urban areas.

Ok ok, i understand BIS has a lot to do and all these vehicles need testing and stuff that takes time away from more important stuff, but i still think the north could have a more versatile ground force.

Then there are some inconsistencies with other equipment. The NS seems to have blown all it's spare change away on AK-74s (the guns are obviously 74s not 47 because of the barrel), interceptor body armor and some Ka-52s (!! ) - look at the 32 second mark on the GC trailer, and interviews have stated that South Sahrani doesn't have an airforce so it's obviously northern. So Northern Sahrani seems more spendthrift then it's armoured force would imply. These are some expesive things to own for an army whose best MBT is the T-72 (and judging from screens of this T-72 it's not a version that poses a threat to an Abrams).

Just my 20,- HUForints.

edit: BIS should really fix it when you put a ) after a ! you get a >_<

[cobra@pulse 0]

In simplistic terms, to answer the thread which it seems a lot of people of late dont do anymore, instead they bicker about completely unrelated matters.

Quote[/b] ]Why should it be so hard for Bohemia to insert a T80?

Because, BIS would now have to go back, start to model a T80, config the T80, test the T80, change the model, re-config possibly, test the T80, package it up again.

This takes time. "But thats their job" i hear you say. Well at the moment their main concerns are to finally get a game published, and secure regional publishers. Theres much more important things to work on than evening out in a BF2 style way, such as code, AI, animations, textures, hardware problems. The list goes on.

To put it this way, BIS need to fund Game 2. At the moment they aren't really making any profit and so will need to get ArmA out soonish to allow them to continue to exist! Adding extra content at this time really isn't something they will be thinking about.

Who knows though, it was said theres most likely going to be patchs in the future, maybe some more content with one could get released. Or there may be a CTI T72, one with higher levels of armour, remember CTI is included with the game now.

So lets keep the discustion about that shall we and not about how you kill a tank, or how good a T72 or Abrams is, because quite frankly, thats not the threads purpose, and most of this thread is now a load of crap thats not releated to the topic question.

Thats all i have to say really, and just my 2 cents.

[martinovic 0]

I find it pretty odd that NS has as pointed out above interceptors and Ka-52 helicopters. But the best tank they have is the t-72...

[DrBobcat 0]

I find it pretty odd that NS has as pointed out above interceptors and Ka-52 helicopters. But the best tank they have is the t-72...

You know what? I really have no "defence" to that and I totally agree with you. The Ka-52 is much more modern helicopter than the T-72 is for a tank. But I would be more than happy to just get the game as is and obtain T-80 (or better) addons later, official or not.

This way BIS can still obtain a sooner profit yet still be able to update and balance out the game later if they need to.

-dRb

[Second 0]

If i remeber correctly, there was chopper "trend" going on, and might be still going. It is possible to have T-72 as best MBT, and using KA-52s as antitank role. As i've heard calculations about effectiveness of chopper versus tank, and i remeber it would be like 1 chopper can replace 3 tanks in battlefield. I don't wan't to speculate that it would be so! But NS generals might have this rating in their heads when thinking of some new weapon investments. NS is atleast hilly if not mountainous, choppers might fit better there...

I'm intrested to meet enemy force (And later to fight in their side as campaign is over) with believable equipment, if it can give a challenge with it. Well choppers needs a finetune to AI, they should do fast attacks with missiles, get to cover and attack again, as in OFP they generaly just flew over enemy and fired when they felt like it.

Someone will do T-80 or T-90 back to ArmA if not presented and even if they were in-game! Well that means Addon chaos, but when having 3000 assaultrifle addons couple T-80 addon doesn't count.

[GBee 0]

Armed forces, especially those of backwater nations tend to make some very strange spending decisions. Though in this case I'm not sure the decision is such a bad one. If you had a limited budget and the choice between a couple of dozen T80s or a few KA-52s which would you choose? The gunships are far more versatile than the tanks, they suit the mountainous terrain of North Sahrani much better and a couple of them combined with hundreds of cheap T72s is a little more formidable and affordable. As far as a Navy goes, they are unlikely to afford anything more than a few patrol boats, but then their only enemy and nearest neighbour is on the same island so wasting money on a Navy seems stupid.

You also have to look at their adversaries. South Sahrani so far seems to only have some M113s. Even assuming we haven't seen their other vehicles yet, they *might* just have a few M1A1s and they don't appear to have any air vehicles at all. Thus North Sahrani armed forces are actually far superior to their Southern neighbours.

As far as the MP argument, well I think you're all lacking imagination. Balance doesn't have to exist through like for like vehicles. You don't even have to have equal numbers on teams. You could limit the server so that the Southern team has only 1/3 the number of players as the North. Or they might be limited to having only 1/3 the number of tanks. You might say that a Ka52 is equal to 2 M1A1s, so there is already balance.

Or you might recognise that the US/UK in Iraq and Afghanistan have taken severe punishment from a force which doesn't have any tanks or helicopters at all, but relies on guerilla warfare - setting ambushes and being highly mobile. Tanks aren't mobile, they can't move through forests, climb mountains or cross rivers. If the Northern team relied on small 3-4man anti-armour teams, destroyed bridges and layed mines/satchels on key routes they would quickly cancel out the advantage of the M1A1.

Edit: Fix spelling/grammar

[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...

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

Why don't they stuff in a vietnam era mod too? I mainly play with vietnam mods, would make it a lot easier for me. Why don't they stuff in WWII units, Star Wars units, Iraq mod, the FDF, SDF, UK Army, ADF and some lego units while at it too? You want the answer? Because none of those, together with the t80, is needed for the storyline in the game. The game is about a war that got no t80 or any FDF/SDF/ADF/UK/Star Wars/Lego/WWII/Iraqi forces in it. Sure, why not add the t80, then add something more, and then some more, and then some more...hell, why don't just postpone the release date until spring 2010, that way they can stuff in quite much...but thankfully they are not adding lots of stuff thats not needed for the storyline in the game, which is quite logical...

[TeRp 1]

I'm with Garcia and GBee on this question.

OFP/ArmA is not a balanced game, if you want one, you can buy Battlefield for very little money.

BIS should focus on those units which are actually needed by them in their campaign, and when they got some spare time left, they should focus on more modding possibilities which will extend ArmAs appeal and options more than a simple tank. Also, vehicles will be added by us, the mod making community, anyways. And as there have been many addons for OFP, it won't take long for addons being converted and used in any mission, including CTI missions.

[Stealth3 0]

I can see this being a huge problem for CTI missions, CTF, and other missions.

The community might make a T-80, but then you will have the cheating and missing addons problem.

Quote[/b] ]Ha, the M1A1 has never been knocked out in battle. The tank is superior to all other tanks. It can withstand direct hit from other M1A1s, even if it's with a sabot round. It can take hits from the rear by an M1A1, which would knock it out but not explode. It can fire going max speed with pinpoint accuracy. It doesn't matter what tank you have or even how many, the M1A1 can engage at a distance of 2 miles. They only way to kill it, because its a game, is if some n00b is driving around and you get behind him.

The M1 was knocked/disabled in battle before. I saw lots of pictures, just not sure what hit it.

Anyway you get the point

[benreeper 0]

Isn't it cheaper to field, and support, an attack helicopter than it is a main battle tank?

--Ben

[TrevorOfCrete 0]

Isn't it cheaper to field, and support, an attack helicopter than it is a main battle tank?

--Ben

no, no and em no.

i think were loosing focus. its a game. people complain that theres no t80 but a state of the art chopper. Well heres some more news, Sahrani dosnt exist. So BI can do really what they want and its no more unrealistic than the game storyline. Personally i dont really care, its nothing that cant be made in the community. As for the cti bit, sure a t72 is no match for an abram, but two t-72's would put up a good fight. Ever though the t72 might be half the cost of the abram?

[Heatseeker 0]

You forgot one important thing: Manpower .

The editor guy might put two T72's foreach Abrams but while the abrams will only need 3 players to be fully operational the 2 T72's will need 6. Saving player slots for all the other roles is important too.

This will be a waste of player slots that could be used elsewhere and it could be avoided with a stronger MBT for the NS forces.

[Big Boss 0]

Well , i think that is good that the side is unbalanced. Balanced teams is boring since what will be the difference of chossing teams ?

2) Someone say that no one will want to play in NS , why? a true player will love to play in NS and think how to beat the other side using just a few mines and a RPG7. The NS team will have to play like a guerrilla and think more than the US side.

Or you guys want something like CS? where the only difference is the objetive ,the starting point and the weapons are almost identical.

[Jensen1 0]

North Sahrani seems very poorly equipped. Now, no army would field a single type of tank, that would be nonsense. Even poor ex-commie states have several types of tanks left over from the glory days of the USSR. So i really think NS should have a few lesser tanks atleast. If the T-72 is the top of the line tank then fine. But it's a pretty big stretch for any army no matter how underequipped to field a single type of tank. NS should have a few T-55s, T-64s. I mean even iraq was better equipped in the armor department.

Not to mention that the north's APC roster is also pretty under-equipped. Only BMP-2s and BRDMs? I understand it's an island republic but then they should have a naval presence if they don't have a good landbased force and i don't see BIS including capital ships anytime soon, so lets just stick with a beefier groundforce. An old style commie force would have a few MT-LBs - for example - to tow around artillery and supplies into areas where trucks don't go too well (like the mountanous northern region). The MT-LB is pretty versatile in terms of equipment, slap a few ATGMs on that cheap tin-can and it can provide some good AT capabilities to the infantry it was carrying, or it can become an AA battery with anything from ZSU-32-2 to SA-13s, so such an APC would be valuable to a budget army (more then a BMP-2 atleast). Sahrani also seems to have a well developed road network so if i would've been in charge of buying equipment then a few BTR-80s would've been ok, for a faster response force in urban areas.

Ok ok, i understand BIS has a lot to do and all these vehicles need testing and stuff that takes time away from more important stuff, but i still think the north could have a more versatile ground force.

Then there are some inconsistencies with other equipment. The NS seems to have blown all it's spare change away on AK-74s (the guns are obviously 74s not 47 because of the barrel), interceptor body armor and some Ka-52s (!! ) - look at the 32 second mark on the GC trailer, and interviews have stated that South Sahrani doesn't have an airforce so it's obviously northern. So Northern Sahrani seems more spendthrift then it's armoured force would imply. These are some expesive things to own for an army whose best MBT is the T-72 (and judging from screens of this T-72 it's not a version that poses a threat to an Abrams).

Just my 20,- HUForints.

edit: BIS should really fix it when you put a ) after a ! you get a    >_<

i know of an army that only has a boat! Frogot the country name tho

[Ase290406 0]

Well another solution to the Abrams vs T-72 problem, might be to implement the T-72B model in ArmA. It has reactive armor and it can launch ATGMs from it's main gun.

T-72B Picture

[Timblesink 0]

Quote[/b] ]i know of an army that only has a boat! Frogot the country name tho

Is it New Zealand?

[Shadow NX 1]

The more i think about this the more i wonder...

A few screens showed months ago that were labeled as Game2 screens showed things that i now see on the ArmA screens like dense forests, strykers and stuff... wich makes me think these were ArmA screens already or the materials were converted to ArmA after BIS noticed they need to make this game a bit more beautiful.

However if thats right then whats with the T90 ive seen on some screens?

How hard would it be to bring that one to ArmA?

Sure its a pretty modern thing but lets say the NS only has like a dozent.

Enough to show them up in few missions ( "Oh shit are those T90s aproaching!?" or at least make them availeable for MP mode.

I mean Ka-50s yes but T90s or at least T-80s no?

I guess the tanks are quite a bit cheaper than a bunch of these helos.

As much as you guys can discuss balancing vs tactics... at the end it often is a eye to eye situation where both tanks try to kill each other and if my memory serves right in some quick played offense style ctf matches you had often not the best cards when you were in the T80s.

Sure it can also kill a M1A1 if youre good but if the M1A1 hits first youre most time as good as dead

[EiZei 0]

Balance ought to be left for the mission makers, I really hate those games where T-72 equals one M1A2.

[-ZG-BUZZARD 0]

You know what, you all forgot about OFP history.

In OFP, there was this island archipelago which the soviets invaded and the U.S. went on a rampage to reconquer.

In ArmA we have a North Sahrani that is communist and we have South Sahrani and the U.S. already stated as helping it.

Do we have any information as what Russia looks like in this ficticious political world? Heck, from all I know the Soviet Union might even still be around.

And taking into account that it could also emulate the U.S. in using "borderline conflicts" (I mean this in the case of cold-war-scenario world-separation into mostly two factions - east vs west) as testbeds for weapons, that Kamov helicopter could be in disguise on a lease or trials or something like that. So I wouldn't be surprised that when the story unfolds and Russia or the Soviet Union comes in to help North Sahrani, it could very well present lots of T-80s, T80UMs or T-90s - heck, I wouldn't be surprised if we'd see some T-12 Black Eagle tanks on the "east side"!!

So think positive about getting some kick-ass high-quality eastern weaponry ingame. Maybe BIS didn't show off more advanced eastern things besides the Kamov so as not to spoil the story.

[Mogley 0]

Thats what I was thinking. People are forgetting that since the NS is communist, that they may receive som help from elite russian units (spetsnatz) who might have red dots, scopes, etc.

In single player the balance will come in numbers(NS have alot more troops,equipment)

And what about SS, arent the US forces there to help. I mean wont the southern forces mostly consist of the natives and a few US to help??

I do think that alot of ppl will still like to play as NS, for one thing alot of people like to play the underdog, like me. You will just have to adjust your tactics if less equiped. Just like hezzbollah has done to israel whos is far, far, far, far, far better equiped.

[Shadow NX 1]

Thats what I was thinking. People are forgetting that since the NS is communist, that they may receive som help from elite russian units (spetsnatz) who might have red dots, scopes, etc.

In single player the balance will come in numbers(NS have alot more troops,equipment)

And what about SS, arent the US forces there to help. I mean wont the southern forces mostly consist of the natives and a few US to help??

I do think that alot of ppl will still like to play as NS, for one thing alot of people like to play the underdog, like me. You will just have to adjust your tactics if less equiped. Just like hezzbollah has done to israel whos is far, far, far, far, far better equiped.

Does sound like a nice possible story but somehow i dont see that happening...

Hey BIS want a T80?

[GBee 0]

I mean Ka-50s yes but T90s or at least T-80s no?

I guess the tanks are quite a bit cheaper than a bunch of these helos.

The relative cost and effectiveness of a helicopter gunship and a modern tank have been mentioned in two or three posts so far. It's being overlooked by many posters though (read back because some valid points have been made).

A gunship is more expensive, but it's also far more useful and powerful. Some have guessed at figures like one Ka-52 is equivalent to 3 or 4 T-80/T-90s. In addition to firepower helicopters have a huge advantage over tanks in speed and maneuverability. One helicopter can repond within or patrol an area that would need 50/100 tanks. There are no obstacles with can block their advance. .

Given a choice between a few T-80s and a gunship who would spend that money on the tanks? Especially when you already own hundreds of T-72s ...

It is a choice btw, for those that seem to think "If they can afford A then they must be able to afford B!". Money is finite, just because you can afford spend $1 million on something doesn't imply you have actually have $2/5/10 million still in the bank!

[Gepard 0]

I think it have no sence to have only good tanks on west side. It doesnt make fun to fight against enemy who is very weaker than you.

[Shadow NX 1]

Yes but after all this is a game and we just discuss if the NS should have more thana T-80 and i gotta say that i dont like the idea of going to fight a M1A1 or a M1A2 in a T-72A

Dunno how that is supposed to work... i just hope they dont make it nearly equal to the modern US tanks or something...

[Second 0]

I think it have no sence to have only good tanks on west side. It doesnt make fun to fight against enemy who is very weaker than you.

KA-52s (Read those posts )

WEAKER (1 chopper == Many MBTs. and again read those posts )

EDIT: Little overreaction again... i just cleaned this reply a bit.