why m48a1 is not prototype

Gopblin
Major-General
Posts: 3620
Joined: Thu 24 May 2012 19:10
Contact:

Re: why m48a1 is not prototype

Postby Gopblin » Mon 15 Jul 2013 03:34

Yep, the better Chap is 1984.

The real deal is the Marder Roland though, 6 per card, extremely deadly to both planes and helos, and armored to boot. 2 cards of em is pretty much all AA you ever need, while PACT needs 3 cards AA minimum.

Best wishes,
Daniel.
Nationality? - Russian.
Occupation? - No, no, just visiting.

diaos
Sergeant
Posts: 55
Joined: Tue 21 May 2013 03:41
Contact:

Re: why m48a1 is not prototype

Postby diaos » Mon 15 Jul 2013 05:47

hotrod525 wrote:
diaos wrote:You know France is a member of NATO


Technicly talking, France was not in the NATO integrated command by the time frame the game is set in, Charle de Gaule resign the NATO military-membership.

In February 1966, France withdrew from NATO military command


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_de_Gaulle#NATO

France is NATO member now.

Akulapanam
Master Sergeant
Posts: 165
Joined: Mon 21 Jan 2013 06:59
Contact:

Re: why m48a1 is not prototype

Postby Akulapanam » Mon 15 Jul 2013 05:52

You can have a chap nerf when you give the PACT a massive helispam nerf.

diaos
Sergeant
Posts: 55
Joined: Tue 21 May 2013 03:41
Contact:

Re: why m48a1 is not prototype

Postby diaos » Mon 15 Jul 2013 06:00

Hartmann wrote:
diaos wrote:
[EUG]MadMat wrote:Because Leo2A4's counterpart is not the T-80U, but the T-80BV. And both are from 1985, and not prototype.
Cease to consider that because one is at the end of family tree, it is per se the equivalent of another end-of-line: T-80U has no equivalent ingame, USSR got it as a bonus because it was cool & iconic.
If you really want to even things, we can remove it completely from the game ...

Pact has more prototype vehicles because each Pact nation has access to more vehicles than their NATO counterparts! So, Pact isn't cheated in any way, it has actually access to more (20 to 25% more if you take only EE's nation, more than 33% if you take ALB's newcomers into consideration) units and more modern vehicles in the form of more prototypes than NATO.

19AP 10 accuracy19front vg stabilizer vs 18AP 7accuracy 17 front normal stabilizer with a useless ATGM?
you called it "counterpart"?
I hope you are not joking
T-80U has no equivalent ingame?
Seahawk has no equivalent ingame
F117 has no equivalent ingame
OH58 Wr has no equivalent ingame
Draken has no equivalent ingame
10 points helicopters have no equivalent in game
The only reliable anti-helicopter AA is Tunguska-M which only available in Soviet deck,consider this fact plz.
If you want a reliable anti-helicopter AA :
1000kg bomber has no equivalent ingame
cheap AA helicopter has no equivalent ingame
...........
do you want more?

otherwise,T80U vs L2A4 within 2000m is half to half.if get closer,L2A4 has higher chance to win, because T80U usually get panic first.


Nice going with the direct insults towards team members that actually bother to reply to the incoherent garbage that you and your buddies keep posting.
ATGM useless? Give us a fricking break, learn to play instead of trolling the forums.

not all ATGM, just Cobra.
You can try to use T80BV count L2A4 in game,I dont care how do you play.
Oh dear dear dear,learn to play?I play better than the man who believes T80BV is the "counterpart " of L2A4
"why M61 shoots so fast in the game?" "as realism.." or like you "learn to play" hahahahah.I have no comment on this.
when its about Pact
"This is a game,we need to consider balance!" even the cannon of su27s and mig29m shoots as slow as AKM in the game.

zbone
Second-Lieutenant
Posts: 755
Joined: Thu 13 Jun 2013 05:31
Contact:

Re: why m48a1 is not prototype

Postby zbone » Mon 15 Jul 2013 06:01

Akulapanam wrote:You can have a chap nerf when you give the PACT a massive helispam nerf.

Always been curious how to effectively helispam as PACT?

diaos
Sergeant
Posts: 55
Joined: Tue 21 May 2013 03:41
Contact:

Re: why m48a1 is not prototype

Postby diaos » Mon 15 Jul 2013 06:05

[EUG]MadMat wrote:
diaos wrote:otherwise,T80U vs L2A4 within 2000m is half to half.if get closer,L2A4 has higher chance to win, because T80U usually get panic first.

But since the T-80U will usually engage first with its ATGM without fear of reprisal, it will be the Leo2A4 which will get stuned/panicked most of the time.

The fact that we are French and based in a "NATO country" holds no relevance to us. Funnily enough, while you are treating us of being "NATO henchmen", others (mostly Americans) usually refers to us as "NATO quiters" because De Gaulle removed us from NATO Central Command. So, apparently, either side we're screwed ... :lol:

So, here is an official statement: we don't care about NATO or Pact. It is irrelevant to us in terms of balancing, modeling, ... We hold no bias toward USSR, Warsaw Pact, ... hell, not even against the British! :D
Now that this statement has been made, any further accusation, although ironical, implied, ... from you or anyone repeatedly calling us bias (any side) on this privately-owned & run forum, will be taken by us as an insult and get you (or anyone) banned.

Therefore, you are free to discuss the Chaparral's stats, maybe it is indeed overpriced, but that isn't a reason why we'll classify a 1984 unit (from memory) as a prototype when it doesn't belong there.

That is the true,but we are talking about why L2A4 is not prototype as it was introduced on the same year with T80U?

User avatar
EliteSniper
Chief Warrant Officer
Posts: 659
Joined: Wed 22 May 2013 07:28
Location: Stratis

Re: why m48a1 is not prototype

Postby EliteSniper » Mon 15 Jul 2013 06:10

yoon5442 wrote:pact's 2kk2m had a 3500 range infrared missle

but it's prototype

nato's m48a1 had a 3500 range infrared missle

but it's non-prototype

and m48a1 cheap than 2kk22m

why m48a1 is not prototype


Umm, The Tung has AAA+un-radar missiles. I believe it has better accuracy to. I think the range of the Tung is 3500km for planes and the range for the Chaparal is like 1500km. That's why........

TankHunter
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 2220
Joined: Tue 31 Jul 2012 06:00
Contact:

Re: why m48a1 is not prototype

Postby TankHunter » Mon 15 Jul 2013 08:05

EliteSniper wrote:
yoon5442 wrote:pact's 2kk2m had a 3500 range infrared missle

but it's prototype

nato's m48a1 had a 3500 range infrared missle

but it's non-prototype

and m48a1 cheap than 2kk22m

why m48a1 is not prototype


Umm, The Tung has AAA+un-radar missiles. I believe it has better accuracy to. I think the range of the Tung is 3500km for planes and the range for the Chaparal is like 1500km. That's why........


I don't use the Chap, but the M48A1 most definitely does/ should have a higher range against planes than 1500m, as it is firing ground based Sidewinders!
"The Nazis entered this war under the rather childish delusion that they were going to bomb everybody else, and nobody was going to bomb them [. . .] They sowed the wind, and now, they are going to reap the whirlwind."

User avatar
orcbuster
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 12362
Joined: Fri 7 Sep 2012 21:04
Contact:

Re: why m48a1 is not prototype

Postby orcbuster » Mon 15 Jul 2013 08:10

the sidewinder does have 3 times the range of the 9M311-M1 so the in game differece seems reasonable.
Image
Viker for ingen!

v-snejok
Chief Warrant Officer
Posts: 656
Joined: Sat 25 May 2013 12:03
Contact:

Re: why m48a1 is not prototype

Postby v-snejok » Mon 15 Jul 2013 09:01

busboy wrote:
What does it matter? Why is there an imperative to have a one for one parity of "prototypes?" And why in God's name are you comparing an aircraft to a multiple launch rocket launcher?


I compare F117 and Buratino because this 2 are unique and the same cost, F117 is very nice, but Buraino almost useless...

Return to “Wargame : AirLand Battle”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests