The good 'ol memes.

Yes, quite a hard split to be honest, especially with ITS members spreading their "truths" on reddit and so on. I am a little sad to see this being done right around PTS test and a soft relaunch as this is about the worst time to do it. I am also sad to see Felix (Nakoomba) gone as he mana...

There were three flamethrower tank projects from WW2. 481 > OT-54, 482 > OT-55 and 483 also produced on T-55 chassis
no OT-62 project exists despite being mentioned widely in western sources.

Same DM as from here?

Steamfunk wrote:Description of the 1V517 unit, also from Stefan Kotsch -

Yeah, ok, but BV-55 doesn't have all of that. Manual pages 8-9-10-11 outline exactly what Azazel wrote.

I hope you aren't an arty player

>Take the heaviest and bulkiest AT launcher to date.
>Give it to the most mobile branch of service where mobility and air deployments are key.

Lumi wrote:Is there any factual evidence.

I don't think just an LRF should justify for 2275 by itself. T-72A doesn't even have lead calculation. Lead calc and ranging should impact accuracy, ballistics should impact distance IMO. 2275 on a T-72 wouldn't really require any significant ballistics adjustment since the straight trajectory goes...

Tanks that IMO have no place in the soviet arsenal- T-34-85 (1969) - Phased to storage by 1970 this is too much of a useless joke. I felt that way in alpha of RD, I still feel this way now. T-55 - As explained previously in this very thread. Nothing over the T-55A except the unused hull coax. Doesn'...

One could say that you remember wargame not for its good models, but for the ones that have character .