Improving armor combat

[Spaz]

Does that really mean it's a joke? What's the convention around here?

BAH! Smiley's was made so that you could understand what mood the poster is in since you can't see my face or hear what tone my voice is in when I'm posting on a forum. So yes that would have made it easier for the reader to understand that it was a joke.

[Skodz]

Hey, as I was giving a lil challenge to training pilots with an AA armor, I told myself, meh? Why can't armor, combat helicopers and jets have a similar locking device for some of their weapons systems ?

You know, the AA armor locking device to lock on aircraft, would it be possible to have it on armor and aircraft to lock on any vehicles or unit...

[CAS_117]

Yes.

[scandhi]

Hasn't this be disscused before? Someone worked on stabilizors, but it fail on the vertical axis, if i remember correct. And the aimbot thing hasn't been of much likeing from the dev's, again if i remember correct.

[Mora]

Which is a shame because it really works. I have proof but i cannot post it as it is a promotional video for a certain hack.

[UncleRob199]

In my opinion the Gyro would be the most important improvement for the tanks' handling. The Challenger and M1 both have it in real life and the T 72 probably does too (though I'm not sure). But that computer targeting system does that really exist in these tanks in real life? I know there is the distance monitor measured with a laser.

But yeah if having the Gyro is hardcoded, then that computer lock on system could maybe be considered to simulate the Gyro.