Jump to content

screenshots 3.0


Recommended Posts

And, once you work that out, you can start adding T-80 into the mix. As far as I'm aware all three types served concurrently up to the end of the Cold War. I've researched this in the past and found something on Tanknet which I printed out for my records. When I get home I'll scan and post here.

OK, here is the printed extract from Tanknet I promised earlier regarding introduction of T-80 into service in GSFG: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/71686353/T-80%20in%20GSFG_Tanknet.pdf

You'll notice the T-80 begins replacing the T-64 from about 1984 onwards and this process continues through 1988.

I also need to correct a mistake I made earlier when quoting from memory that the T-64B equipped one battalion per regiment and the T-64A two battalions:

Interestingly, I understand the A and B were used in the same tank regiments in GSFG with the more capable (and expensive) B equipping one battalion and the A two. This may be more a rule of thumb than absolute but opens up some interesting possibilities for scenario designers - assuming they wish to represent a whole regiment, or at least two battalions, of T-64s! :eek2:

It seems the actual ratio was one T-64B company per battalion versus two companies of T-64A.

Cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 947
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Just done the same. Thanks for the 'heads up' Rhys. (A printed order form you fax or post? How quaint.)

No probs Tjay, I received my copy today and I think it will tell you everything you ever wanted to know about a contemporary (2009) British reconnaissance regiment, and possibly a bit more. It's a treasure trove of close-up colour photos of all the kit too.

As an aside, it looks like the Iveco "jeep" coming in v3.0 can be used to represent the Panther Command and Liason (CLV) in service with the British Army. The Command Troop of the reconnaissance regiment has three. Anyway, there's plenty of that sort of (nerdy?) info to be found in the book... Enjoy!

Edited by Panzer_Leader
Correction to number of Panther CLV in Command Troop.
Link to post
Share on other sites
No probs Tjay, I received my copy today and I think it will tell you everything you ever wanted to know about a contemporary (2009) British reconnaissance regiment, and possibly a bit more. It's a treasure trove of close-up colour photos of all the kit too.

As an aside, it looks like the Iveco "jeep" coming in v3.0 can be used to represent the Panther Command and Liason (CLV) in service with the British Army. The Command Troop of the reconnaissance regiment has six. Anyway, there's plenty of that sort of (nerdy?) info to be found in the book... Enjoy!

Panzer Leader, thanks very much for the heads up, looking forward to this book :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

As an aside, it looks like the Iveco "jeep" coming in v3.0 can be used to represent the Panther Command and Liason (CLV) in service with the British Army. The Command Troop of the reconnaissance regiment has six. Anyway, there's plenty of that sort of (nerdy?) info to be found in the book... Enjoy!

Not, looks like.

Is.

:biggrin:

Link to post
Share on other sites
OK, here is the printed extract from Tanknet I promised earlier regarding introduction of T-80 into service in GSFG: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/71686353/T-80%20in%20GSFG_Tanknet.pdf

You'll notice the T-80 begins replacing the T-64 from about 1984 onwards and this process continues through 1988.

I also need to correct a mistake I made earlier when quoting from memory that the T-64B equipped one battalion per regiment and the T-64A two battalions:

It seems the actual ratio was one T-64B company per battalion versus two companies of T-64A.

Cheers

Just to add to the resource,

http://208.84.116.223/forums/index.php?showtopic=33428

interesting discussion RE: 1979 GSFG tank composition.

Link to post
Share on other sites
What we have here are applique-less variant, so they would fit anytime before 1982.

BTW, AFAIK, you can still use the T-64B up to 1985. Unless I am mistaken, they certainly upgraded to the T-64BV by then, but not every T-64 battalion was upgraded, and in 1985 I think they still fielded a lot of different variants.

Link to post
Share on other sites
BTW, AFAIK, you can still use the T-64B up to 1985. Unless I am mistaken, they certainly upgraded to the T-64BV by then, but not every T-64 battalion was upgraded, and in 1985 I think they still fielded a lot of different variants.

I thought glacis applique crash program was quite widespread...? Welding a plate is not much of an "upgrade."

But well, I'm not sure if 1982 brought about just welding a 20mm applique or glacis overhaul AND 20mm applique. If latter, surely number of T-64s to have received the treatment would drop sharply.

Do you know of any detail about it?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Or we can not have any T-64, then none would be any worse off for it.

Sometimes a community can start to sound a little neurotic when nothing is good enough to this degree.

I'm sorry if I look ungrateful. On the contrary, I'm very grateful for even seeing a T-64 in any sim and eSim delivered not one but two variants!

I'm just prone to bean counting and since T-64 is my favorite among cold war tanks, I got excited and carried over.

I'll stop the details nitpicking if community frowns upon such things.

Edited by Companion
deleted a possibly misleading comment.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Or we can not have any T-64, then none would be any worse off for it.

Sometimes a community can start to sound a little neurotic when nothing is good enough to this degree.

Agreed. The T-64 would be interesting as eye candy. But I don't see it doing anything the T-72 series or the T-80U can't already do.

If you're going to wish for something, wish for a T-90. :biggrin:

Link to post
Share on other sites

On the scripted recovery options, did you get a chance to fix the recovery “Trebuchet“?

That is a crock being recovered gets hurled several thousand metres and totally damaged if there is anyone occupying it (F6, F7, F8 or F9 views) during the recovery process?

Link to post
Share on other sites

will there be some more improvements comming for map/mission editing ?the current map options rather rather limited,it would be nice to have some more objects to make maps more accurate.

Link to post
Share on other sites
will there be some more improvements comming for map/mission editing ?the current map options rather rather limited,it would be nice to have some more objects to make maps more accurate.

Sorry but I don’t understand what you are getting at here.

How are they “not accurate” when based on imported data, its not like someone is just manually drawing contour lines?

If you want every urban area in say a 20 x 20 map to have every street light, bus stop and other piece of “traffic furniture” then personally I think that a huge ask, esp when it has bu**er all impact on the sim.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Agreed. The T-64 would be interesting as eye candy. But I don't see it doing anything the T-72 series or the T-80U can't already do.

If you're going to wish for something, wish for a T-90. :biggrin:

Well, that all depends. ;)

If you put the T-64 in early 1980s scenarios, before the T-80U was fielded (and we don't have an earlier T-80 than that at the moment), then actually the T-64 is the king of the soviet force. The T-64B has missiles, it is quite fast, and a T-80 type FCS -- it is more or less prototype T-80. Then you can go back further than that with the T-64A combined with BMP-1 and it is pretty tough pre T-72 combination. It really all depends on the period of time of the scenario you want to create.

I'm sorry if I look ungrateful. On the contrary, I'm very grateful for even seeing a T-64 in any sim and eSim delivered not one but two variants!

I'm just prone to bean counting and since T-64 is my favorite among cold war tanks, I got excited and carried over.

I'll stop the details nitpicking if community frowns upon such things.

Well, I didn't take it as being ungrateful myself, seemed to me like you were just asking for more information about the T-64. ;)

To answer your previous question: no, I don't have much information about the T-64 with 20mm applique armor. I had a book around here about the T-64's history but I cannot seem to find it at the moment. But really, I think the T-64 is one of those areas like the T-72B discussion: a bit of unknown and confusion, plus the T-64 had extensive upgrades. The version added in SB is the 1981 model, but I was under the impression that the biggest difference prior to the BV ERA variant of 1985'ish was the anti-radiation cladding added to the roof. This wouldn't have any effect in SB, and if there was 20mm more armor added to the turret front(?) after the 1981 model then that wouldn't, IMO at least, be a significant difference to the degree that the T-64B mod.1981 wouldn't suffice (not against NATO 120mm anyway). A T-64BV would be nice addition for 1985 scenarios, but even still the non-BV type B variants were still in use at that time AFAIK.

Edited by Volcano
typo
Link to post
Share on other sites
Sentry gun :eek2:

Sweet!! :biggrin:

New favourite feature!

Just need that Fast Fire Fun, MG42/3 based gun on the Lemur now! :)

Shame we don't have Actual Alien Aliens. that'd be kickass!

Maybe Steel Beasts Sci Fi as a spin off?

With Hammers Slammers, Colonial Marines, Weland-Yutani PMCs, OCP ED 209s, Cyberdyne, Techcom, Tyrell & finally the Rebel Alliance and the Galactic Empire.

I've always itched to see how a Leopard 2 could educate the Imperial AT-ATs in ground warfare.

Darth Vader: "General Veers! Why is your head missing??!"

Link to post
Share on other sites
Because you set this: 86kgSCj.png ?

Well I was thinking more along the lines of a DM53 round punching in through that massive window on the front.

Seriously, why do they have that?

Is it so they can watch the pathetic serfs flee in terror?

As far as ballistic holes go, that's as big as your gonna get. :confused:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Well I was thinking more along the lines of a DM53 round punching in through that massive window on the front.

Seriously, why do they have that?

Is it so they can watch the pathetic serfs flee in terror?

As far as ballistic holes go, that's as big as your gonna get. :confused:

In Star Wars (if you actually want to start this nerdy debate) apparently projectile weapons have been given up entirely in exchange for energy based weapons, maybe they are laser shots. Assuming that the walkers have some anti-laser coating/polarization filter/absorption like the vision blocks on current military vehicles, that light be sufficient. Which opens up the question why the entire hull isn't made of transparent material, so you can watch your six ("For structural reasons, of course! Glass is too rigid!"), etc., etc.

Favoring energy based weapons is an odd choice, given that they are proven to be ineffective against Jedi, and discounting the question what their seemingly inexhaustible source of energy actually is (did you ever see a battery change? Maybe it's "cold fusion"? (LOL)). The answer to all this is surprisingly simple:

Just roll with it, it's cool!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry but I don’t understand what you are getting at here.

How are they “not accurate” when based on imported data, its not like someone is just manually drawing contour lines?

If you want every urban area in say a 20 x 20 map to have every street light, bus stop and other piece of “traffic furniture” then personally I think that a huge ask, esp when it has bu**er all impact on the sim.

When i talk about map editing i dont mean contour lines,iam just wondering if there will be more object to chose from when editing the map in the map editor, like walls, hedges,ditches,infantery trenches,buildingblocks,electricity mast,haystacks,dirtpiles,oildrums,just to name a few.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...