Blakeman wrote:The reason for the pwnage during desert storm was the type of static line warfare that the Iraqis were used to against Iran compared to the movement combat that the US was trained to do. If you can move and shoot you can almost always win against a static opponent that remains in a tank berm.
I'm not saying mirror balance, just that a lot of talk here makes the T-72 out to be some WW2 era tank against 'modern' tanks. The t-72 is hardly a 'relic' and can be used effectively, it just lacks the electronics and some of the newest armor upgrades that the challenger and abrams enjoy.
It is funny though as you dont see talk about how much the huey sucks because of its age (it doesnt either, just a comparison).
Have I been stamped as some ignorant "AMERICA-PWNZ-EVERATHING"-fool?
I've never talked about the 72 as a "relic". With the proper upgrades (as the ones they are using within the Russian Ground Forces) it can probably be a tough opponent for any western tank.
And the things you mentioned about lacking power in electronics and armour is exactly what I mean by this tank being obsolete compared to the Abrams or Challenger. How much fun will a direct engagement between a T-72 and an Abrams be in-game if the T-72 can't whitstand as much damage as its American opponent? Should the T72-crews be forced to flank enemy tanks in order to defeat them while the Abrams should be able to directly engage enemy targets without problems?
You can't "mirror-balance" these two tanks as it wouldn't be realistic. I can accept
And the Huey-comment is completely irrelevant. I have never really said that the T-72 is a worthless or even a bad tank, just that it's not as good as the tanks it will be facing in PR, turning it into a balance issue.