T-72 for the mecs?

bigpimp83 · Post by **bigpimp83** » 2008-12-02 05:01

i went to the USI website and found the model of a t72 is it possible or is it being considered to replace the MEC T-90 with the T-72?

Waaah_Wah · Post by **Waaah_Wah** » 2008-12-02 05:30

IIRC a DEV said that MEC will be getting a new tank in the future.

Post by **Jaymz** » 2008-12-02 05:31

USI's T72-M1 Will be the replacement of the MEC T-90 for 0.85. But that is only temporary, there is a proper modern tank that is in the works in which will take on the role as the MEC's MBT. Sadly, this won't make it in game for 0.85 but it's a top priority for 0.9.

-=TB=-Tobakfromcuba · Post by **-=TB=-Tobakfromcuba** » 2008-12-02 05:58

seems the t72 fits much more to mec than the t90 does. you guys will have righteous good feedback for this decision.

Waaah_Wah · Post by **Waaah_Wah** » 2008-12-02 06:25

How are you guys planning on balancing things? From what i understand, T72 is not as well armoured as an Abrams.

Post by **Jaymz** » 2008-12-02 06:34

Waaah_Wah wrote:How are you guys planning on balancing things? From what i understand, T72 is not as well armoured as an Abrams.

For 0.85 it will just mirror the Abrams. When it gets replaced in 0.9 though, it will be total asymmetry across the board. Both the new PLA/MEC tanks coming in 0.9 will have significantly different traits that will make NATO vs OPFOR tank combat very unique. A front page news post or a dev journal post will be made when both of these tanks are finished and it will go into detail about what I mean.

Waaah_Wah · Post by **Waaah_Wah** » 2008-12-02 06:36

Okay

0.9 will be interesting for sure...

Will probably be some complaining about T72 being as strong as the Abrams though. But it makes more sence than having a T90

npsxbox · Post by **npsxbox** » 2008-12-02 06:58

why doesn't the T-90 fit in with the MEC? Is it because its the newest Russian tank? And which tank will be replacing both of them? Will China and MEC have the same tank?

Tannhauser · Post by **Tannhauser** » 2008-12-02 07:06

No, China will get its own tank once it's finished (The ZTZ-99 ) while MEC .. will have it's own (undefined yet it seems).

mat552 · Post by **mat552** » 2008-12-02 13:36

[R-DEV]Jaymz wrote:When it gets replaced in 0.9 though, it will be total asymmetry across the board. Both the new PLA/MEC tanks coming in 0.9 will have significantly different traits that will make NATO vs OPFOR tank combat very unique.

My "holy grail" of PR is apparently only 2 releases away!

Also, T-72, good stuff.

Post by **DankE_SPB** » 2008-12-02 13:57

will T-72 or T-90 use guided missiles in any release?

General Dragosh · Post by **General Dragosh** » 2008-12-02 15:18

DankE_SPB wrote:will T-72 or T-90 use guided missiles in any release?

If u like those go play Point of Existance

Maybe a rusrian faction might have it but doubt it cause of balance issues

And i wonder what tank the MEC will get..............ill go search trough my army vehicles recognition guide maybe ill find something

Post by **Outlawz7** » 2008-12-02 15:20

Will the T72 be kept as a tank for asymmetrical maps, kinda like T62s vs. British Warriors and Scimitars on Fools Road..?

Reddish Red · Post by **Reddish Red** » 2008-12-02 15:25

Tannhauser wrote:No, China will get its own tank once it's finished (The ZTZ-99 ) while MEC .. will have it's own (undefined yet it seems).

I remember reading somewhere that the replacement MEC tank is the Leclerc

STORM-Mama · Post by **STORM-Mama** » 2008-12-02 15:55

Wait now... Why not replace the T90 when this new, unknown tank is completed instead of using some supah-T72 as a placeholder? I won't be able to take MEC/NATO armour combat seriously if the T72 is mirrored to the Abrams nad Challenger. We all know how poorly these things performed during Desert Storm, so making them just as good as the Abrams is kinda stupid...

Placeholder, sure, but why not let the T90 be that placeholder?

General Dragosh · Post by **General Dragosh** » 2008-12-02 16:13

Reddish Red wrote:I remember reading somewhere that the replacement MEC tank is the Leclerc

yuck......french tank...i dont seem to like it for some reason...is there no other tank to be used ?

Post by **DankE_SPB** » 2008-12-02 16:14

we all know how poorly these things

you mean T-72 is a **** which only can burn? lol T-72 modernizations(i.e. "Rogatka") very close to T-90, especially to the first series of T-90(there are some modernized T-90A)

STORM-Mama · Post by **STORM-Mama** » 2008-12-02 16:17

DankE_SPB wrote:you mean T-72 is a **** which only can burn? lol T-72 modernizations(i.e. "Rogatka") very close to T-90, especially to the first series of T-90(there are some modernized T-90A)

I know, but this model they are going to use as placeholder is not one of these "modernized" versions.

Post by **Duke** » 2008-12-02 16:22

STORM-Mama wrote:I know, but this model they are going to use as placeholder is not one of these "modernized" versions.

Believe that if you want

Post by **Bob_Marley** » 2008-12-02 16:22

Because the T-72 model looks prettier.

Anyway, when looking at "modern" tanks currently in use with middle eastern forces (discounting Israel and Turkey) theres only 3 real competitors, the M1A1/A2s of Egypt, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia (which are by far the most numerous and widley used), the LeClercs of the UAE and the Challenger 1 "al-Hussein" used by Jordan.

Other than that there are a multitude of upgraded T-55, T-62, T-72 and Patton series tanks in service with Middle Eastern armies.

Edit - oops, forgot the 38 Challenger 2s that Oman have.

T-72 for the mecs?

T-72 for the mecs?

Re: T-72 for the mecs?

Re: T-72 for the mecs?

Re: T-72 for the mecs?

Re: T-72 for the mecs?

Re: T-72 for the mecs?

Re: T-72 for the mecs?

Re: T-72 for the mecs?

Re: T-72 for the mecs?

Re: T-72 for the mecs?

Re: T-72 for the mecs?

Re: T-72 for the mecs?

Re: T-72 for the mecs?

Re: T-72 for the mecs?

Re: T-72 for the mecs?

Re: T-72 for the mecs?

Re: T-72 for the mecs?

Re: T-72 for the mecs?

Re: T-72 for the mecs?

Re: T-72 for the mecs?