Suggestions for Current Under Used Tanks [Improvements]

User avatar
Froggy
Master Sergeant
Posts: 158
Joined: Mon 13 Feb 2012 11:42
Location: Orléans (45)
Contact:

Re: Suggestions for Current Under Used Tanks [Improvements]

Postby Froggy » Thu 5 Apr 2012 09:53

Kovlovsky wrote:The problem that I have about your suggestion to upgrade the armor of the AMX-30B2 is that it isn't realistic and will make them more powerful that they should be. The AMX-30 always had thin armor and it was a design choice. The French tought that there would never be enough armor to protect a tank against HEAT projectiles and they designed the AMX-30 to be fast and well armed, but with little armor. The upgrades only uparmored it in a limited way. A better idea would be to give it a decent stabiliser since it had one in real life and it would be in line with how this tank should be used in this game : a mobile gun platform and a flanking tank. We already have the Leopard 1 if you want a more durable medium MBT and is inferior in accuracy and firepower. The Leopard would become less used and we will to rebalance it. For the Kpz-70, I think that lowering the cost would be enough.

Last thing, I don't think that the AMX-32 cost needs to be reduced, it already got a large buff in the last patch. The stabiliser it got make it an excellent heavy hitting tank. Don't forget that it's really fast and can wreak havoc if you use it well. It's not made to be on the first line of an attack, but as a flanking tank, it's great. It's probably the most powerful cavalry tank in the game. Edit : the AMX-32 and T-64BM have both the same speed, my bad. However, I don't think this fact weaken my point a lot.


AMX30B2 never had a stabiliser.

DeuZerre wrote:Atually, the best thing they could do with the AMX-32' would be to add it to the AMX-30s line. If you have the M8 AGS after the sheridans, I don't see why a tank that's just an upgraded 30B2 (IRL) isn't in their deck line. As oit stands: It's a good tank on some maps, but takes a whole deck card. No need to add armour.

In fact, the lineage should be AMX30B>AMX32>AMX30B2.
The AMX32 was proposed as an evolution of AMX30B. But it was an expensive option (new chassis, new turret, so new tank). Instead, the army choose to buy 300 new AMX30B2 and upgrade 700 AMX30B Only some parts of the AMX32 where include in the upgrade: gunner sight and ballistic computer, engine and gear box, drive train.
The stabilised sight was not adopted due to cost (so no fire on the move). No Upgrade of the amour package was done, except a thicker mantlet for the 70 last new tanks (build in the last 80')
Last edited by Froggy on Thu 5 Apr 2012 11:16, edited 1 time in total.
Plus vite, Plus fort, Plus loin
507 RCC, Le forum francophone de Steel Beasts

Kovlovsky
Captain
Posts: 1547
Joined: Sat 25 Feb 2012 07:18
Location: Québec
Contact:

Re: Suggestions for Current Under Used Tanks [Improvements]

Postby Kovlovsky » Thu 5 Apr 2012 09:59

Froggy wrote:
Kovlovsky wrote:The problem that I have about your suggestion to upgrade the armor of the AMX-30B2 is that it isn't realistic and will make them more powerful that they should be. The AMX-30 always had thin armor and it was a design choice. The French tought that there would never be enough armor to protect a tank against HEAT projectiles and they designed the AMX-30 to be fast and well armed, but with little armor. The upgrades only uparmored it in a limited way. A better idea would be to give it a decent stabiliser since it had one in real life and it would be in line with how this tank should be used in this game : a mobile gun platform and a flanking tank. We already have the Leopard 1 if you want a more durable medium MBT and is inferior in accuracy and firepower. The Leopard would become less used and we will to rebalance it. For the Kpz-70, I think that lowering the cost would be enough.

Last thing, I don't think that the AMX-32 cost needs to be reduced, it already got a large buff in the last patch. The stabiliser it got make it an excellent heavy hitting tank. Don't forget that it's really fast and can wreak havoc if you use it well. It's not made to be on the first line of an attack, but as a flanking tank, it's great. It's probably the most powerful cavalry tank in the game. Edit : the AMX-32 and T-64BM have both the same speed, my bad. However, I don't think this fact weaken my point a lot.


AMX30B2 never had a stabiliser.

DeuZerre wrote:Atually, the best thing they could do with the AMX-32' would be to add it to the AMX-30s line. If you have the M8 AGS after the sheridans, I don't see why a tank that's just an upgraded 30B2 (IRL) isn't in their deck line. As oit stands: It's a good tank on some maps, but takes a whole deck card. No need to add armour.

In fact, the lineage should be AMX30B>AMX32>AMX30B2.
The AMX32 was proposed as an evolution of AMX30B. But it was an expensive option (new chassis, new turret, so new tank). Instead, the army choose to bye 300 new AMX30B2 and upgrade 700 AMX30B Only some parts of the AMX32 where include in the upgrade: gunner sight and ballistic computer, engine and gear box, drive train.
The stabilised sight was not adopted due to cost (so no fire on the move). No Upgrade of the amour package was done, except a thicker mantlet for the 70 last new tanks (build in the last 80')


Then the book that wikipedia uses to claim that a gun stabilisation was added in 1971 is incorrect (Crow, Duncan; Robert J. Icks (1975). Encyclopedia of Tanks. London, United Kingdom: Barrie & Jenkins). I'm not a specialist, but if someone has access to the book or a more recent one (1975 is old), it would end the debate. Personnally, since the AMX-30 was supposed to be fast and agile, gun stabilisation would be a must. It would be a very irrationnal move to not install them.
Image
Courtesy of Graphic

User avatar
Froggy
Master Sergeant
Posts: 158
Joined: Mon 13 Feb 2012 11:42
Location: Orléans (45)
Contact:

Re: Suggestions for Current Under Used Tanks [Improvements]

Postby Froggy » Thu 5 Apr 2012 10:41

I was a AMX30B and B2 Tank commander, so this close the debate!

An AMX30B rebuilt as B2, my very first tank, Fontevraud 1995, 507ème Regiment de Chars de Combat.
Image
Last edited by Froggy on Thu 5 Apr 2012 11:13, edited 1 time in total.
Plus vite, Plus fort, Plus loin
507 RCC, Le forum francophone de Steel Beasts

User avatar
marechal_darsh
Sergeant Major
Posts: 254
Joined: Mon 5 Mar 2012 21:19
Contact:

Re: Suggestions for Current Under Used Tanks [Improvements]

Postby marechal_darsh » Thu 5 Apr 2012 10:54

Froggy wrote:I was a AMX30B and B2 Tank commander, so this close the debate!


Wikipedia lost :o (again!)

Froggy is more reliable than wiki ;)
"Impossible n'est pas français"

Napoléon Bonaparte

ow592
Sergeant First-Class
Posts: 125
Joined: Mon 19 Mar 2012 01:01
Contact:

Re: Suggestions for Current Under Used Tanks [Improvements]

Postby ow592 » Thu 5 Apr 2012 13:03

Hazed wrote:Nato Side Tank Suggestions:
AMX-30B2 - at current price (55) improvement needed +1 Front Armor (Current armor 3/2/1/1 | With Improvement 4/2/1/1)
AMX-32 - Tank as is should have price decreased to 80 (Current price 100)
M8 AGS - Tank as is should have price decreased to 55 (Current price 70)
KPz 70 - at current price (110) improvement needed +1 side armor +1 rear armor +1 top armor (Current armor 7/3/1/1 | With improvement 7/4/2/2) ** OR **
Tank as is should have price decreased to 80 (Current price 110)


The only tank of this list that I see not often in games is the M8 AGS.

User avatar
DeuZerre
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 11125
Joined: Mon 27 Feb 2012 23:17
Location: Universe, Galaxy, Solar System, Earth, Ground, Eurasian Continent, Main Landmass.
Contact:

Re: Suggestions for Current Under Used Tanks [Improvements]

Postby DeuZerre » Thu 5 Apr 2012 13:42

@ Froggy I believe I read in an other source (can't remember witch one) that SOME of the latest (either 30B2 or 32, but I believe it is B2 as 32 never hit the shelves) did get stabilizers, but most didn't. I'll try to get that source again.
Image
Marshal honoris causa
FLX wrote:Removing the weaknesses from the divisions leads to all divisions being the same in the long run. We won't proceed like that.

User avatar
Mitchverr
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 10646
Joined: Sat 24 Mar 2012 18:08
Contact:

Re: Suggestions for Current Under Used Tanks [Improvements]

Postby Mitchverr » Thu 5 Apr 2012 15:19

The M8 AGS imo works a treat as an anti spam tank, i use it alongside chieftan mk10s alot and many of my clanmates also use them because the rof is just amazing, especially helps to buff up the rof of the chieftan series of tanks (6 rounds a min, i mean cmon). A little bit of cost reducation would be extremely helpful because right now at 70 points each, these guys are painful to lose to a guy using arty spam tactics to support a t55 rush, as they cant suvive even the weakest rocket arty barrage and need constant micromanagement to keep going. Also i aint 100% sure about it, but if a M8 kills say, 4 or 5 T55s, they start vetting up, and will in the long run alot of the time because of arty be more of a detriment because they give more points to the enemy then they take because as i said, very weak to arty barrage.

Though i have to say, although i use them sometimes, the chief mk 2 and mk 5 are rarely used against me, i am guessing because of their horrific rof and less acc comapred to tanks of same price ranges. But are overall "okay", though could use a little buff to make them worthwhile imo.
Image

User avatar
Froggy
Master Sergeant
Posts: 158
Joined: Mon 13 Feb 2012 11:42
Location: Orléans (45)
Contact:

Re: Suggestions for Current Under Used Tanks [Improvements]

Postby Froggy » Thu 5 Apr 2012 17:48

DeuZerre wrote:@ Froggy I believe I read in an other source (can't remember witch one) that SOME of the latest (either 30B2 or 32, but I believe it is B2 as 32 never hit the shelves) did get stabilizers, but most didn't. I'll try to get that source again.


Even if you find it, none receive such upgrade.
If it had been the case, those would have been the AMX30B2 Brenus, whose were the last upgrade (80 tanks, in service in 1-2 RCH.) But it's not the case.
I was an AMX30 TC and later a Leclerc tank platoon leader, from 1994 to 2009, and now in the Army reserve. I'm up to date with what was in those tanks, and was not.
Plus vite, Plus fort, Plus loin
507 RCC, Le forum francophone de Steel Beasts

User avatar
DeuZerre
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 11125
Joined: Mon 27 Feb 2012 23:17
Location: Universe, Galaxy, Solar System, Earth, Ground, Eurasian Continent, Main Landmass.
Contact:

Re: Suggestions for Current Under Used Tanks [Improvements]

Postby DeuZerre » Thu 5 Apr 2012 19:03

J'ai pas dit que je ne te croyais pas ...

It's just that I had a source (found it again, but it's irrelevant anyway) and therefore thought it to be reliable. You're more reliable obviously as you used the system. Strange the guys didn't add that when all other NATO tanks used at least basic stabilizers (Even Chieftains had a stab-like system to at least keep an eye on target on the move).

Well, basic national stuff. Even non-standard ammunition :|
Image
Marshal honoris causa
FLX wrote:Removing the weaknesses from the divisions leads to all divisions being the same in the long run. We won't proceed like that.

Kovlovsky
Captain
Posts: 1547
Joined: Sat 25 Feb 2012 07:18
Location: Québec
Contact:

Re: Suggestions for Current Under Used Tanks [Improvements]

Postby Kovlovsky » Thu 5 Apr 2012 19:15

marechal_darsh wrote:
Froggy wrote:I was a AMX30B and B2 Tank commander, so this close the debate!


Wikipedia lost :o (again!)

Froggy is more reliable than wiki ;)


I don't care about Wikipedia, I care about published sources. Sorry, but a written testimony isn't a good enough source for me. Wikipedia quoted a published book and I was asking a scolarly source for verifying the claim. If we find a scorlarly or primary source (like an official internal document) about that, the debate will be ended. However, right now, I can't do the search myself because I'm very busy.
Last edited by Kovlovsky on Fri 6 Apr 2012 07:08, edited 1 time in total.
Image
Courtesy of Graphic

Return to “Wargame : European Escalation”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests