On USMC and VDV

User avatar
Broth3r
Chief Warrant Officer
Posts: 627
Joined: Mon 10 Mar 2014 19:25
Location: Lisbon, Portugal
Contact:

Re: On USMC and VDV

Postby Broth3r » Mon 26 Dec 2016 01:34

Seryn wrote:Play Ace Combat 6: Fires of Liberation, NOW THATS ONE HELL OF AN ENDING
FOR ONE HELL OF A STORY.



All of the major characters in the story inform us of how they cope with the end of the war.

God, I adore Ace Combat 6, but the story is frankly terrible. The only character arc I found remotely interesting was Voychek's.

Of course, the people who fap about AC5 and MUH STORY (which is crap) and completely ignore it's absolutely atrocious mission structure that inevitably comes about whenever Kazutoki Kono is allowed anywhere near game direction, with small wave-based spawns and full-on pauses in gameplay to shove all that plot down your throat - *breathe* - will call AC6 a terrible game for its terrible story and ignore its absolutely GLORIOUS gameplay because who cares about that amirite.

But I digress.

PS: And holy shit, overlord73, completely forgot about that guy. Literally the worst AC player I have ever seen, who sadly had an HD capture card before anyone in the community did. Watching him play is torture.

User avatar
another505
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 13128
Joined: Sun 21 Jul 2013 05:18
Location: Hiatus
Contact:

Re: On USMC and VDV

Postby another505 » Mon 26 Dec 2016 01:56

Ac zero and ac 3 had pretty cool story
Image
Of Salt

User avatar
FrangibleCover
Lieutenant
Posts: 1465
Joined: Mon 14 Nov 2016 21:34
Contact:

Re: On USMC and VDV

Postby FrangibleCover » Mon 26 Dec 2016 02:09

Seryn wrote:Link Pl0x

Pretty sure this is it, I was lurking back then but I must have bailed out of that thread before it got good inflammatory.
viewtopic.php?f=155&t=37284&start=150
In other news, plz no derails. Except the thread has been derailed for days.

Generally the 'specialised' Spec decks (Marine and Airborne) should all be better represented. They will probably never be 'good' compared to Unspec but they should be fun. This means generally thinking about them in terms of units that are introduced, doing stuff like bringing the CVR(T)s back to 130km/h road speed and giving Spartans to specialist teams, opening up the Warsaw Pact Marines to the equipment of the motor rifle divisions that were designated for boaty things, giving the Germans Heli-Wiesels and, indeed, the suggested changes in the OP.

Also, LAV-25 for Rangers (representing Force Recon). If it's in the recon tab because it was used to transport reconnaissance infantry then make it transport reconnaissance infantry. Eugen cannot have their cake and eat it.
What if Wargame stuck to timeframe?
Image

User avatar
HrcAk47
Colonel
Posts: 2788
Joined: Sat 3 May 2014 18:00
Contact:

Re: On USMC and VDV

Postby HrcAk47 » Mon 26 Dec 2016 02:31

I am honestly gonna assemble VDV as a standalone nation. So many good stuff for it!

ZPRK Roman - Pantsir missile platform only, for VDV.

RSZO Grom (akin to Yugo BOV Raketaš) - carries S-8 rocket blocks and reloads.

And many more...
Attachments
tmp_11732-post-1-1237290790890911507.jpg
RSZO Grom
tmp_11732-post-1-1237290790890911507.jpg (13.36 KiB) Viewed 909 times
tmp_11732-pantsi51425794599.jpg
ZPRK Roman
tmp_11732-pantsi51425794599.jpg (168.32 KiB) Viewed 909 times
The SEAD never bothered me anyway.

SMB Yugoslavia Retexture Mod, now released, v.1.0

User avatar
wargamer1985
Brigadier
Posts: 3305
Joined: Sat 4 May 2013 00:36
Contact:

Re: On USMC and VDV

Postby wargamer1985 » Mon 26 Dec 2016 03:35

FrangibleCover wrote:
Seryn wrote:Link Pl0x

Pretty sure this is it, I was lurking back then but I must have bailed out of that thread before it got good inflammatory.
viewtopic.php?f=155&t=37284&start=150
In other news, plz no derails. Except the thread has been derailed for days.

Generally the 'specialised' Spec decks (Marine and Airborne) should all be better represented. They will probably never be 'good' compared to Unspec but they should be fun. This means generally thinking about them in terms of units that are introduced, doing stuff like bringing the CVR(T)s back to 130km/h road speed and giving Spartans to specialist teams, opening up the Warsaw Pact Marines to the equipment of the motor rifle divisions that were designated for boaty things, giving the Germans Heli-Wiesels and, indeed, the suggested changes in the OP.

Also, LAV-25 for Rangers (representing Force Recon). If it's in the recon tab because it was used to transport reconnaissance infantry then make it transport reconnaissance infantry. Eugen cannot have their cake and eat it.

Ah nostalgia...I believe that was before the reign of Poptart too. And in a time where M548 please were still relevant...
APPLY TO THE GLORIOUS CULT OF THE WARHAWK! LIBERATING NAZIS SINCE 1939!
Image

User avatar
hansbroger
Lieutenant General
Posts: 4428
Joined: Sun 28 Jul 2013 03:45
Contact:

Re: On USMC and VDV

Postby hansbroger » Mon 26 Dec 2016 10:12

Image
Projectnordic in game! will likely see you on pact/red dragons/french!
Image

User avatar
another505
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 13128
Joined: Sun 21 Jul 2013 05:18
Location: Hiatus
Contact:

Re: On USMC and VDV

Postby another505 » Fri 6 Jan 2017 20:51

So, is the BMD change going to stay? Any chance for it to change back when it was fine before?

it has 15mm armor sloped but made by aluminum. It has 1fav because it has 1av irl.
Image
Of Salt

codextero
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 2334
Joined: Sat 13 Dec 2014 02:52
Contact:

Re: On USMC and VDV

Postby codextero » Fri 6 Jan 2017 21:12

another505 wrote:So, is the BMD change going to stay? Any chance for it to change back when it was fine before?

it has 15mm armor sloped but made by aluminum. It has 1fav because it has 1av irl.


Armor should be comparable to an M113A1, which is 53mm of LOS 5083 for ~17-18mm RHAe.

BMD-1 looks to have ~42 mm LOS aluminium, which means ~14mm RHAe, clearly not 2AV material.

Also BMP-3 should lose at least 1 FAV due to misreading the armor diagram as steel when it's actual aluminium.

Seryn
Sergeant Major of the Army
Posts: 360
Joined: Mon 5 Dec 2016 06:00
Contact:

Re: On USMC and VDV

Postby Seryn » Fri 6 Jan 2017 21:16

Broth3r wrote:
Seryn wrote:Play Ace Combat 6: Fires of Liberation, NOW THATS ONE HELL OF AN ENDING
FOR ONE HELL OF A STORY.



All of the major characters in the story inform us of how they cope with the end of the war.

God, I adore Ace Combat 6, but the story is frankly terrible. The only character arc I found remotely interesting was Voychek's.

Of course, the people who fap about AC5 and MUH STORY (which is crap) and completely ignore it's absolutely atrocious mission structure that inevitably comes about whenever Kazutoki Kono is allowed anywhere near game direction, with small wave-based spawns and full-on pauses in gameplay to shove all that plot down your throat - *breathe* - will call AC6 a terrible game for its terrible story and ignore its absolutely GLORIOUS gameplay because who cares about that amirite.

But I digress.

PS: And holy shit, overlord73, completely forgot about that guy. Literally the worst AC player I have ever seen, who sadly had an HD capture card before anyone in the community did. Watching him play is torture.



I replayed twice AC6 a couple of months ago on Highest difficulty, once using only Nighthawk (I needed to avoid gaming after that because that was more rage than I am Bread) and another using an A-10, A-10 Playthrough was actually quite fun.

On Topic: I hope for 505's sake BMD nerf gets reverted. I don't play Stalinist Nation.

User avatar
Yakhont
Colonel
Posts: 2870
Joined: Sat 31 Mar 2012 04:33
Contact:

Re: On USMC and VDV

Postby Yakhont » Fri 6 Jan 2017 21:34

codextero wrote:
another505 wrote:So, is the BMD change going to stay? Any chance for it to change back when it was fine before?

it has 15mm armor sloped but made by aluminum. It has 1fav because it has 1av irl.


Armor should be comparable to an M113A1, which is 53mm of LOS 5083 for ~17-18mm RHAe.

BMD-1 looks to have ~42 mm LOS aluminium, which means ~14mm RHAe, clearly not 2AV material.

Also BMP-3 should lose at least 1 FAV due to misreading the armor diagram as steel when it's actual aluminium.


There are different grades of aluminium alloy, just as there are of steel.

Spoiler : :
PROTECTION

The aluminium hull of the BMD-2 is carried over from the BMD-1, and the turret is made of steel, just like with its predecessor. The vehicle is very light, but that is not to say that the vehicle has distinguishably poor protection per se; Although the BMD-2 is much lighter than most other IFVs, it is also much, much smaller than most other IFVs, which means that it retains armour density roughly equal to that of a volumetrically larger and correspondingly heavier vehicle.
The hull is made of aluminium alloy, while the turret is made of steel. The frontal arc can withstand .50 caliber machine gun fire at reasonable distances, and the sides can resist 7.62mm machine gun fire with good guarantees - slightly worse than the non-airborne BMP-2 nominally, but superior to the M113, a similarly aluminium-cladded armour personnel carrier.

The aluminium used for the BMD-2 is alloy ABT-101, same as with the BMD-1. According to several research papers written on the subject, the effectiveness of aluminium armour may reach up to 50% of steel, but non-armour grade aluminium alloys are typically only around 40% as effective (or less). An example of this would be 5083 alloy, which were only 34% as effective as steel for the same thickness, given that the plates used were above a certain thickness threshold. ABT-101 was specially developed for use as armour, and because of that, it had more suitable properties, giving it significantly better performance (up to 45% as effective as steel armour). However, because of aluminium's generally worse hardness, it is much less capable of deflecting ballistic threats than typical armour-grade steel for the same thickness, so aluminium armour does not gain as much protection from angling as hard, armour-grade steel would. ABT-101 has a hardness of approximately 145 BHN, harder than mild steel and harder than 7039 aluminium alloy, which is known to be used in American designs like the M551 Sheridan and M2 Bradley, and much, much harder than the 5083 alloy used in the M113, which had a hardness of just 75 BHN, but much lower than typical RHA steel, which typically ranges from 220 BHN to 300 BHN in hardness. The comparatively greater hardness affords the BMD-2 better performance against bullets of all types compared to foreign aluminium armour of the same weight, and certainly significantly greater potential as sloped armour.

https://thesovietarmourblog.blogspot.sg ... storm.html

Does a +5 point increase on an auto cannon vehicle really hurt its efficiency? The BMD-1 change hurts more but I feel the BMD-2 is fine.
Image

Return to “Wargame : Red Dragon”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 37 guests

cron