Project Reality Forums

[R-DEV]J.F.Leusch69 wrote: and the T72 fires 125mm rounds while the M1A2 (which the current model looks like) has a 120mm cannon.

There's a lot more involved than just the diameter of the round.

Regarding what happened in game, either you weren't hitting it in the weaker areas or there were some hit detection problems. I've shot a tank upwards of ten times on Kashan before it blew up. It wasn't even moving and I know all the rounds impacted the tracks.

Abrams has a few spots which cause you do to die instantly. Most of really easy to hit.

You could have even been hit before without knowing it. That always gets me which is why I dont tank. Youd think getting hit would be a bigger deal, but Ill take a round and we'll be like "were we hit?" "Ummm idk, y?" "idk, i thought maybe we were...hmmm" BOOOM!!!!!

Im sure some dev posted a while back about ATGM for all opfor tanks and new mec tank .

Whats going on with this idea? ;>

I do sometimes think it should make it more obvious when the armoured vehicle you're in has been hit...

To the OP, yeah BF2 hit registration sucks sometimes - I have experience of pummeling US tanks with APFSDS rounds for a good minute or so to the front armour with no effect Ah well...

Some days you are the truck, others the hedgehog.

Also, I thought the T-72 was a mirror (IE same properties - gun damage, armour, speed etc.) of the Abrams until the DEVs could get some assymetric balance between then sorted?

Stu.

I know I saw some new M1A1/A2 models around the forums somewhere, perhaps they'll fix this problem? Or at least make it slightly less bad.

i thought the T-72 was still just a miror the the M1A1 thats ingame. but yeah, the T-72 usually takes 3 hits to bring down.

You most likely were attacking a BMP instead of a T-72.... they might have used the equivilant of this:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/W3MF9VLclRw&hl ... ram><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/W3MF9VLclRw&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/youtube]

It would be great to see asymmetric balancing of armor.

2ClipsOneKill wrote:I know that Forgotten Hope 2 have this for the tanks with that flaw...
You'd think it would be fixed for such a mothern tank. :S
btw
Is there any picture of damage zones for the PR tanks laying around somewhere?

There definately was one of the Challenger circa 0.7 floating around, but I can't find it for the life of me. If memory serves it had a lot of small and random damage points in places I didn't expect.

Hunt3r wrote:It would be great to see asymmetric balancing of armor.

You're starting to sound like my sockpuppet.

Elektro wrote:No the Abrahams can withstand 4 tank shells if you hit it straight on. Use "x" to zoom in with gun and aim for the tracks, or where ever you want.

No, it can't unless you hit it directly to the left and right of the turret, even then I'm skeptical.

And lol, don't tell me how to zoom in and fire when you can't even name the tank you're talking about properly.

Hunt3r wrote:It would be great to see asymmetric balancing of armor.

Are you trolling? The last thing this game needs is more asymmetrical combat.

To be honest if thats what you want then the MEC may as well become an insurgent faction and have a tank made out of lego.

rampo93(FIN) wrote:Lets not start another ''my tanks better than yours'' discussion, Just gonna get the thread locked. And we were supposed to talk about the thing that happened in-game

'[R-DEV wrote:J.F.Leusch69;1227935']the current MEC tank is the T72M which cant fire any rockets at all.

and the T72 fires 125mm rounds while the M1A2 (which the current model looks like) has a 120mm cannon.

and yeah, stop the **** my weapons is better than yours descussions!

sorry i didnt think i was saying that the M1 Abrams is better than any other tank. i just saw on the military channel show "top ten" for tanks and the M1 Abrams mbt was number 2 (number was was T-34 i think)

source:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QF3_7uf6 ... PL&index=1

dtacs wrote: Are you trolling? The last thing this game needs is more asymmetrical combat.

To be honest if thats what you want then the MEC may as well become an insurgent faction and have a tank made out of lego.

Assymetry =/= Insurgency.

It just means the two sides have differing strengths. All tactics have their basis in scientific differences between the capabilities of combatants, so creating assymetry in their capabilities increases the relevance and importance of good tactics.

In reality different tanks have very different capabilties in terms of maneuvrability, survivability, range and firepower, and that's what has made tank combat interesting in real wars. It isn't just an East/West thing, even different NATO tanks have different emphases, for example the Leopard 2 boast greater range than the M1 or C2, while the C2 is well known for being a tank among tanks.

As has been pointed out many times, at the moment factions are all like pizzas that look and smell really awesome and different. The variety is tantalising until you open the boxes and realise they're all almost exactly the same flavour except for the Insurgents and Taliban which have anchovies and faeces, and are thus unappetising to most people.

Dtacs, even if you disagree with other forum users, please remain respectful, unless you want to get infractions.

Ok, there is no secret anti-tank missiles. Great!

Next time im out battling t-72s, were should I aim if he is coming up head on with frontal armor facing me? The deflective bouncing shot between the hull and turret is very hard to make against t-72s. Alot easier when facing an Abrams. I would not try it because the chances of success is really close to 0, especially from this distance.

Any tips? Tracks vulnerable? Possible to hit the driver through the armor? Should i try to shoot down his barrel and hit the loading midget in the face? What to do?

Truism wrote:It just means the two sides have differing strengths. All tactics have their basis in scientific differences between the capabilities of combatants, so creating assymetry in their capabilities increases the relevance and importance of good tactics.

In reality different tanks have very different capabilties in terms of maneuvrability, survivability, range and firepower, and that's what has made tank combat interesting in real wars. It isn't just an East/West thing, even different NATO tanks have different emphases, for example the Leopard 2 boast greater range than the M1 or C2, while the C2 is well known for being a tank among tanks.

Tanks are very different in the ways they are designed. So in real life, it may take a T-72 to 3 or 4 shots to knock out an M1 Abrams, which I believe is true, especially if the M1s on PR are designed after the M1A2.

[quote=""'[R-DEV"]Dunehunter;1228330']Dtacs, even if you disagree with other forum users, please remain respectful, unless you want to get infractions.[/quote]
I don't see where I insulted him, to be honest if he, or anyone else for that matter, cannot properly name a vehicle they are making a point about then they don't have the right to argue in the first place.

But hey, you're the mod, draw the line and I'll respect that. And I mean that in an entirely respectful manner.
[quote="Truism""]Assymetry =/= Insurgency.

It just means the two sides have differing strengths. All tactics have their basis in scientific differences between the capabilities of combatants, so creating assymetry in their capabilities increases the relevance and importance of good tactics.

[/quote]
Unconventional warfare (abbreviated UW) is the opposite of conventional warfare. Where conventional warfare is used to reduce an opponent's military capability, unconventional warfare is an attempt to achieve military victory through acquiescence, capitulation, or clandestine support for one side of an existing conflict.

Unconventional warfare then.

The abrams is bugged like hell in PR, it dies almost instantly while the t72 can withstand multiple hits. Always aim for the tracks when you can, it will kill a tank in 2 shots and hope the t72 doesnt know your weakspots.

Truism wrote:
at the moment factions are all like pizzas

Sounds delicious!

I was thinking it feels like I die a lot more in an Abrams than in a T-72.