Members Ssnake Posted May 7, 2016 Members Share Posted May 7, 2016 1 hour ago, lavictoireestlavie said: My question, does the Merkava 2 come with the LAHAT missile as a potential option ? Nope. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ssnake Posted May 7, 2016 Members Share Posted May 7, 2016 19 minutes ago, Stratos said: The 6x6 vehicle at the end of the video is a Pandur I? Yes. There are actually four Pandurs in the video, the ambulance 2x, and the Pandur I first with simple cal .50, and then with remote weapon station (ERCWS). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CalAB Posted May 7, 2016 Share Posted May 7, 2016 So a few questions on the Merkava. The main gun, 120mm? What version of Mark, A, B , C… Infantry and if so can we change the type during scenerio creation? Thanks in advance. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IrishHussar Posted May 7, 2016 Share Posted May 7, 2016 22 hours ago, dejawolf said: that was Darkangels pet project. he's got a serious hardon for the chieftain mk.5 Just need a Challenger 1 and we have the full set ;-) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stratos Posted May 7, 2016 Share Posted May 7, 2016 1 hour ago, Ssnake said: Yes. There are actually four Pandurs in the video, the ambulance 2x, and the Pandur I first with simple cal .50, and then with remote weapon station (ERCWS). Rgr, thanks! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dejawolf Posted May 7, 2016 Share Posted May 7, 2016 2 hours ago, CalAB said: So a few questions on the Merkava. The main gun, 120mm? What version of Mark, A, B , C… Infantry and if so can we change the type during scenerio creation? Thanks in advance. no the main gun is 105mm. and it's a merkava 2. there's 2 versions in SB, one that has the full ammo, and one that carries infantry, but has reduced ammo. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CalAB Posted May 7, 2016 Share Posted May 7, 2016 (edited) A bit confused now. Earlier in this thread Ssnake mentioned that the model of the Merkava shown in the terrain comparison video did not have a 105mm gun. Did the IDF use smaller guns then the 105 on their Merkava MarkII's in the late seventies? It has a fume extractor and sorta' looks like a 120mm? And I'm guessing the smaller ammo capacity version with infantry will indeed be able to have that infantry type changed in the scenario editor. Edited May 7, 2016 by CalAB 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lavictoireestlavie Posted May 7, 2016 Share Posted May 7, 2016 (edited) 17 minutes ago, CalAB said: A bit confused now. Earlier in this thread Ssnake mentioned that the model of the Merkava shown in the terrain comparison video did not have a 105mm gun. Did the IDF use smaller guns then the 105 on their Merkava MarkII's in the late seventies? It has a fume extractor and sorta' looks like a 120mm? And I'm guessing the smaller ammo capacity version with infantry will indeed be able to have that infantry type changed in the scenario editor. It is most certainly an early production Merkava II and the Merkava II's have all used 105 mm guns. Edited May 7, 2016 by lavictoireestlavie 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ssnake Posted May 7, 2016 Members Share Posted May 7, 2016 Looks like I squinted too hard. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panzer_Leader Posted May 7, 2016 Share Posted May 7, 2016 13 hours ago, smithcorp said: Wow - are they new M113s? They look great. Agree, and it looks like there's a completely new 3D model for the M113G at least. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dejawolf Posted May 7, 2016 Share Posted May 7, 2016 1 minute ago, Panzer_Leader said: Agree, and it looks like there's a completely new 3D model for the M113G at least. yeah, roguesnake has been spending the better part of a year updating M113s. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Splash Posted May 7, 2016 Share Posted May 7, 2016 Will the new mine-protectant vehicles shown (and the ones already in the sim) now provide carried troops with some degree of protection from mines? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koen Posted May 7, 2016 Share Posted May 7, 2016 3 hours ago, dejawolf said: merkava 2 ... and one that carries infantry ... ? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ssnake Posted May 7, 2016 Members Share Posted May 7, 2016 1 hour ago, Splash said: Will the new mine-protectant vehicles shown (and the ones already in the sim) now provide carried troops with some degree of protection from mines? I suppose once that we actually find the time to work on a more realistic base model of HE detonations, they will. Until then there isn't really much that can be done on the vehicle model's side. We need to address the way how explosions are handled instead. Unfortunately Fate has a habit to foil my plans and determined intent to have the team work on this for at least five to six years now. I'd go ballistic if that would actually help anything, but the reality is that we put this on hold over and over again for perfectly justifiable reasons. But no matter what, the end result is still the same, we're still stuck with a model of explosions with which I am not satisfied. What's making things difficult is that the underlying model is "sort of adequate", it's not glaringly wrong and works at least so-so in most cases. If it were utterly broken the whole topic would receive top priority. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibsonm Posted May 8, 2016 Share Posted May 8, 2016 I guess the other issue is that what are the outcomes people are after. Most of these MRAP vehicles are designed to be sacrificial (i.e. the vehicle is wrecked but the occupants aren't killed). So you wont see a MRAP driving through a AT minefield surviving a bunch of detonations and delivering its passengers to their destination in good order, ready to fight. Even if the vehicle "succeeds" and is destroyed/heavily damaged protecting its passengers, they are usually no longer combat effective anyway. They are dazed, shocked, bruised, etc. and for most of an average SB scenario would spend their time sorting themselves out, extracting the wounded, etc. From a player's perspective those guys are "out of the game", regardless of whether they are killed outright or survive the explosion but are unable to contribute. So I don't think you are going to see the MRAP get heavily damaged, the troops dismount and continue on as if nothing happened (as an extreme case). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dejawolf Posted May 8, 2016 Share Posted May 8, 2016 human T-72M1 vs AI Merkava. not a good day for israel. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CalAB Posted May 8, 2016 Share Posted May 8, 2016 Ouch. I found this little bit of info on the Mark2 from Wikipedia, not sure how accurate it is though. It looks like it will be sweet for urban type scenerios, not so good for open fields as the above video would seem to imply The Mark II was first introduced into general service in April 1983. While fundamentally the same as the Merkava Mark I, it incorporated numerous small adjustments as a result of the previous year's incursion into Lebanon. The new tank was optimized for urban warfare and low intensity conflicts, with a weight and engine no greater than the Mark I.[16] The Mark II used the same 105 mm main gun and 7.62 mm machine guns as the Mark I, but the 60 mm mortar was redesigned during construction to be located within the hull and configured for remote firing to remove the need to expose the operator to enemy small-arms fire. An Israeli-designed automatic transmission and increased fuel storage for increased range was installed on all further Mark IIs. Anti-rocket netting was fitted for increased survivability against infantry equipped with anti-tank rockets. Many minor improvements were made to the fire-control system. Updated meteorological sensors, crosswind analyzers, and thermographic optics and image intensifiers gave greater visibility and battlefield awareness. Newer versions of the original Mark II were designated: Mark IIB, with thermal optics and unspecified updates to the fire control system. Mark IIC, with more armor on the top of the turret to improve protection against attack from the air. Mark IID, with modular composite armor on the chassis and turret, allowing rapid replacement of damaged armor. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Splash Posted May 8, 2016 Share Posted May 8, 2016 Re: MRAPS. I understand and agree with Gibsonm's point about onboard troops being rendered "combat ineffective" in the event of an encounter with a mine or IED. I get the fact that the sim handles a concussion the same as a decapitation. And I also wouldn't want to see players using MRAPs in any sort of a gamey manner to get troops across a minefield, for example. My peeve has been the effective 100 percent loss of borne troops 100 meters from a blast. Being dismounted at that distance is just as "survivable" in the sim at present. We might just as well transport troops in that odd golf-cart-like thingy in the video. Until the issue is addressed, these kewl MRAP models are essentially eye candy. Not that there's anything wrong with eye candy. Bring it on. I do appreciate Ssnake's explanation of the 'why' though. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAJ_Fubar Posted May 8, 2016 Share Posted May 8, 2016 The thing to remember about the Merkava is that it's effectively a Winnebago on tracks with a cannon. She's got a thin hull and a narrow turret and is optimized for long term dug-in defensive engagements against an advancing foe. Sure, she's got good mobility in rough terrain, but I would be cautious in using the Mk I or Mk II in most offensive situations. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dejawolf Posted May 8, 2016 Share Posted May 8, 2016 (edited) poor old merkava didn't do so well in built up areas either. infantry with PG-7VL to the side, and there goes the turret. Edited May 8, 2016 by dejawolf 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibsonm Posted May 8, 2016 Share Posted May 8, 2016 Great Its not even out yet and someone will start complaining that its "under-modelled". 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CalAB Posted May 8, 2016 Share Posted May 8, 2016 DAMMIT!! But hey, look at those groovy fire effects. Under the hull and even one of the wheels are glowing. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apocalypse 31 Posted May 8, 2016 Share Posted May 8, 2016 1 minute ago, CalAB said: DAMMIT!! But hey, look at those groovy fire effects. Under the hull and even one of the wheels are glowing. The .50cal stayed intact too. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mpow66m Posted May 8, 2016 Share Posted May 8, 2016 any word on the grunts? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apocalypse 31 Posted May 8, 2016 Share Posted May 8, 2016 2 hours ago, mpow66m said: any word on the grunts? This x1000 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.