PDA

View Full Version : OT: Help bring this amazing tank sim to America



MZ6
01-27-2005, 08:49 AM
This game http://www.t-72.iddk.ru/en/screen.html is available in Russia only unless we let 'em know how we would buy it if released here

MZ6
01-27-2005, 08:49 AM
This game http://www.t-72.iddk.ru/en/screen.html is available in Russia only unless we let 'em know how we would buy it if released here

MZ6
01-27-2005, 09:11 AM
Here a forum thread with some info http://forum.crazyhouse.ru/viewtopic.php?t=300&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

Capt._Tenneal
01-27-2005, 09:21 AM
Being spoiled by the amazing things in Oleg's sims. I'm now wanting to see a similar treatment for Armor and Naval games. Not by Oleg necessarily, but I hope an "Oleg" of Tank and Naval sims comes along.

EURO_Snoopy
01-27-2005, 09:26 AM
For some details on T-72 and English versions of the manual and game menu:

Airwarfare T-72 Page (http://www.airwarfare.com/tankwarfare/t72/index.htm)

Also have a look at Wartime Command (http://www.airwarfare.com/tankwarfare/wartimecommand/index.htm)

Capt._Tenneal
01-27-2005, 09:49 AM
So, if you're the "good guy" in a T-72, who are the "bad guys" supposed to be ?

EURO_Snoopy
01-27-2005, 09:59 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Capt._Tenneal:
So, if you're the "good guy" in a T-72, who are the "bad guys" supposed to be ? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Click on T-72 link above to find out

CzechTexan
01-27-2005, 11:31 AM
The other tank game Wartime Command looks impressive too and it's by 1C

Capt._Tenneal
01-27-2005, 12:07 PM
OK. I went to the official site for the T-72 game, some quotes :

" For the first time these machines were used during the 1982 conflict in Lebanon, in the Bekaa valley. Soon the Western mass media began to describe the Lebanese desert as being dotted with the destroyed Syrian T-72s. "

" The general public, ignorant of such peculiarities, could, of course, believe in the heavy casualties of the Syrian T-72 tanks, taking into account the professionalism of the film-makers. "

" So, why do this all? The answer is rather simple for those, who is acquainted with the Eastern customs. The Soviet tanks, which gave a good account of themselves in the war with the Israeli became a real threat for the American weapon traders on the Near-Eastern market. The countries there are rather rich, and they will not agree to buy low-quality goods. That is why the American businessmen had to deceive their potential customers. "

" After the war operations in Lebanon were over in 1982, the president of Syria H. Asad claimed in one of his interviews, that "Tank T-72 is the best in the world," and emphasized, that the Israeli soldiers failed to destroy or hit at least one of these machines produced in the USSR. "

" In case of direct collision of the "seventy-seconds" and the "Merkavas" the Soviet machines always won. "

" The T-72 tanks also gave a good account of themselves during the "Desert Storm" operation in 1991. "

" Nevertheless, the Iraqi still coped with the American tanks using even such outdated shells, proving once more the battle power of the Soviet tanks. "

" At the meeting with the officers of the Academy he told in great detail about the American tankmen destroying the Iraqi tanks and about the general dash military campaign of the American troops in Iraq. But when he was asked about the quantity of the American tanks lost there, the general got embarrassed and refused to answer, explaining his behavior by tiredness "

" the most of the Iraqi tanks were destroyed by the Iraqi themselves when retreating, if there were problems with fuel or ammunition supply. There were cases, when the Iraqi left the tanks intact, at first sight, on the battlefield. "

" So, for example, a Syrian armoured division consisting of the tanks produced in the USSR, when making a 1000 km march on their own, did not leave a single tank on the way, during the whole way there was not a single breakage, not a single failure! Altogether during the "Desert Storm" operation, as it turned out, there were destroyed... 14 T-72 tanks, including those that were destroyed by the retreating Iraqi troops. "

" The episodes described above prove the high survivability and reliability of the T-72 tanks and disprove the fables of some of the Western specialists about this tank to be easy to destroy. " [END QUOTES]

I'd like to see how they DO bring this sim to America . What will the box cover be ? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

MZ6
01-27-2005, 12:55 PM
Didn't a obscure WWII flight sim http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif set in the 'wrong' theater turn out do well when sold outside of Russia

Zyzbot
01-27-2005, 02:17 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Capt._Tenneal:
OK. I went to the official site for the T-72 game, some quotes :

" For the first time these machines were used during the 1982 conflict in Lebanon, in the Bekaa valley. Soon the Western mass media began to describe the Lebanese desert as being dotted with the destroyed Syrian T-72s. "

" The general public, ignorant of such peculiarities, could, of course, believe in the heavy casualties of the Syrian T-72 tanks, taking into account the professionalism of the film-makers. "

" So, why do this all? The answer is rather simple for those, who is acquainted with the Eastern customs. The Soviet tanks, which gave a good account of themselves in the war with the Israeli became a real threat for the American weapon traders on the Near-Eastern market. The countries there are rather rich, and they will not agree to buy low-quality goods. That is why the American businessmen had to deceive their potential customers. "

" After the war operations in Lebanon were over in 1982, the president of Syria H. Asad claimed in one of his interviews, that "Tank T-72 is the best in the world," and emphasized, that the Israeli soldiers failed to destroy or hit at least one of these machines produced in the USSR. "

" In case of direct collision of the "seventy-seconds" and the "Merkavas" the Soviet machines always won. "

" The T-72 tanks also gave a good account of themselves during the "Desert Storm" operation in 1991. "

" Nevertheless, the Iraqi still coped with the American tanks using even such outdated shells, proving once more the battle power of the Soviet tanks. "

" At the meeting with the officers of the Academy he told in great detail about the American tankmen destroying the Iraqi tanks and about the general dash military campaign of the American troops in Iraq. But when he was asked about the quantity of the American tanks lost there, the general got embarrassed and refused to answer, explaining his behavior by tiredness "

" the most of the Iraqi tanks were destroyed by the Iraqi themselves when retreating, if there were problems with fuel or ammunition supply. There were cases, when the Iraqi left the tanks intact, at first sight, on the battlefield. "

" So, for example, a Syrian armoured division consisting of the tanks produced in the USSR, when making a 1000 km march on their own, did not leave a single tank on the way, during the whole way there was not a single breakage, not a single failure! Altogether during the "Desert Storm" operation, as it turned out, there were destroyed... 14 T-72 tanks, including those that were destroyed by the retreating Iraqi troops. "

" The episodes described above prove the high survivability and reliability of the T-72 tanks and disprove the fables of some of the Western specialists about this tank to be easy to destroy. " [END QUOTES]

I'd like to see how they DO bring this sim to America . What will the box cover be ? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Good to see that the old Pravda writers are gainfully employed. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

LStarosta
01-27-2005, 03:23 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Capt._Tenneal:
OK. I went to the official site for the T-72 game, some quotes :

" For the first time these machines were used during the 1982 conflict in Lebanon, in the Bekaa valley. Soon the Western mass media began to describe the Lebanese desert as being dotted with the destroyed Syrian T-72s. "

" The general public, ignorant of such peculiarities, could, of course, believe in the heavy casualties of the Syrian T-72 tanks, taking into account the professionalism of the film-makers. "

" So, why do this all? The answer is rather simple for those, who is acquainted with the Eastern customs. The Soviet tanks, which gave a good account of themselves in the war with the Israeli became a real threat for the American weapon traders on the Near-Eastern market. The countries there are rather rich, and they will not agree to buy low-quality goods. That is why the American businessmen had to deceive their potential customers. "

" After the war operations in Lebanon were over in 1982, the president of Syria H. Asad claimed in one of his interviews, that "Tank T-72 is the best in the world," and emphasized, that the Israeli soldiers failed to destroy or hit at least one of these machines produced in the USSR. "

" In case of direct collision of the "seventy-seconds" and the "Merkavas" the Soviet machines always won. "

" The T-72 tanks also gave a good account of themselves during the "Desert Storm" operation in 1991. "

" Nevertheless, the Iraqi still coped with the American tanks using even such outdated shells, proving once more the battle power of the Soviet tanks. "

" At the meeting with the officers of the Academy he told in great detail about the American tankmen destroying the Iraqi tanks and about the general dash military campaign of the American troops in Iraq. But when he was asked about the quantity of the American tanks lost there, the general got embarrassed and refused to answer, explaining his behavior by tiredness "

" the most of the Iraqi tanks were destroyed by the Iraqi themselves when retreating, if there were problems with fuel or ammunition supply. There were cases, when the Iraqi left the tanks intact, at first sight, on the battlefield. "

" So, for example, a Syrian armoured division consisting of the tanks produced in the USSR, when making a 1000 km march on their own, did not leave a single tank on the way, during the whole way there was not a single breakage, not a single failure! Altogether during the "Desert Storm" operation, as it turned out, there were destroyed... 14 T-72 tanks, including those that were destroyed by the retreating Iraqi troops. "

" The episodes described above prove the high survivability and reliability of the T-72 tanks and disprove the fables of some of the Western specialists about this tank to be easy to destroy. " [END QUOTES]

I'd like to see how they DO bring this sim to America . What will the box cover be ? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


This sure holds lots of credibility. If people were whining about Russian planes being uber due to nationalistic bias, I wonder what people would have to say about THIS utter load of sh1t.

Wildcat_zero
01-28-2005, 03:42 AM
hi

I know its a suprise to you americans but the T-72 is a rather good tank. For one never believe the propaganda, two if the M1A2 arbrams can be knocked out by rpgs, then lends some credence about the low quality of american hardware. Russian tanks have been very good since the T34.

chaikanut
01-28-2005, 06:13 AM
Russian tanks with the latest reactive armour and protection systems are formidable. I am not sure how a vanilla T72 would stand against the ''silver bullet'' http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif.

Potatodip
01-28-2005, 07:25 AM
What amazes me is that no one have seene on the right side that there is something called "the last days" &lt;------looks like an FB addon to me http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif anyone knows what this is???

dadada1
01-28-2005, 08:31 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Potatodip:
What amazes me is that no one have seene on the right side that there is something called "the last days" &lt;------looks like an FB addon to me http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif anyone knows what this is??? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes I noticed this as well, I wish someone could shed light on this. Possibly its a mission expansion by JustFlight simlar to BOE. I stand to be corrected or informed otherwise.

plumps_
01-28-2005, 08:38 AM
The Last Days (http://www.airwarfare.com/tld/)

Aztek_Eagle
01-28-2005, 09:08 AM
now i wanna see the next screenshot of this one

http://www.t-72.iddk.ru/images/35_large.jpg

MZ6
01-28-2005, 11:25 PM
http://t72.iddk.ru/images/shot_2004_07_20_16_10_47_0051.jpg

In this photo, you can see the tank is a Leopard 1, even admitted by NATO as the equal of a T-72. It certainly isn't an M1A1. I also beleive, like the Sherman v Tiger, a lot of T-72s with well trained troops could take out an Abrams. Besides most of the fighting would occur between similarily equiped former Warsaw Pact units.


Propoganda on either side notwithstanding, I've tried the demo, steep learning curve, but seems pretty sweet.

civildog
01-28-2005, 11:47 PM
Will the autoloading system in the game sometimes load the gunner's arm like the real ones did? Or can that be switched off in the game?

Just kidding...it's a good tank, if there's anythingthe Russians know how to make it's a tank. Does the game have the new Kontakt-5 blazer armor and SHTORA jammers?

I know the M1 is the best in the world and all that (at least against Third World crews, against the Soviets was my personal nightmare in Germany), and the F-15 is awesome, but why aren't we buying some of these Russian super tanks and planes. I mean, my God...the SU-27 can lock and fire at planes behind it! The exchange rate between the ruble and the dollar means these fantastic weapon systems would be a steal!

Of course our tankers would have to be even shorter than they are now but they can do wonders with elective surgery these days.

Destraex
01-29-2005, 01:25 AM
hope its moddable

Von_Rat
01-29-2005, 01:41 AM
i remember a american general saying, that if american troops were in the tanks the iraqis had, and the iraqis had the abrams, the americans still would of won. because their traing was very superior, to the traing the iraqis had.

woofiedog
01-29-2005, 01:55 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gifWhy would Russian Tankers want to be fighting with a T-72 when they could be driving around in one of these Baby's?

Russian Heavy tanks

Weight: 50? tons
Length: 6,982 m
Width: 3,582 m
Height: 1,80 m
Armour: active mm
Gun: 125 mm
Crew; 3(-5?)
Engine: 16/1200 hps
turbo diesel
Speed: 54 km/h
"Tjorny Aryol" (Black Eagle) was shown for the first time at an international exhibition of armaments in Russia in 1997 (picture). This tank has a entirey new thinking where the turret don't have any crew inside. They dwell in the main hull separated from the main gun ammunition that is stored in the rear and under the turret. The fireing system has automatic loading which increases the rate of fire. Minister of armaments, said (1997) Russia will be able to make 350 unit a year by 2005. It should have come into service in 1999, but did not. Rumors (in 2001) say it will be produced for export only and not be used by the Russia army. Time will tell.

Black Eagle drawing
http://www.nemo.nu/ibisportal/5pansar/5sidor/5bilder/blackeagle.gif

http://www.nemo.nu/ibisportal/5pansar/5sidor/5bilder/tjorniritn.jpg


Weight: 46-50 tons
Length: 9,53 m
Width: 3,78 m
Height: 2,23 m
Armour: mm
Gun: 125 mm
Engine: 840-1000 hps
Speed: 65/45 km/h
Range: 55-65 km
T-90 gun-missile tank came a couple of years into the 1990s and was a better version of troublesome T-80 (engine). The gun tube can be replaced without dismantling inside the turret. The gun can fire anti-tank guided missiles. Ballistic computer and DVE-BS wind gauge and day/night sight which has identification ranges of 800 m during the day and 700 m at night. The tank is protected by both conventional armour-plating and explosive reactive armour, and has equipment for mine-clearing and NBC protection. The T-90 is provided with infrared jammer, laser equipment etc.
T 90 drawing

http://www.nemo.nu/ibisportal/5pansar/5sidor/5bilder/t90.jpg

http://www.nemo.nu/ibisportal/5pansar/5sidor/5bilder/t90ritn.gif

Heavy tank

Weight: 45 tons
Length hull: 7 m
Width: 3.40 m
Height: 2.20 m
Armour: 500 mm
Crew: 3
Gun: 125 mm
Engine: Gas turbine
1000/1250 hps
Speed: 70 km/h
T80 is a further development of the T64. It was first produced in 1983. It is equipped with a 125 mm main gun and possesses many of the same complicated systems which the original T64 had, but free from problems. T80 has much thicker turret armour and the hull is protected by composite active armour. ABC-protection is standard and diving ability to 5 m depth. It is estimated that over 20,000 units were in operation by 1997 in Russia and the number was growing as its successor to be, T90, still was in a low level of production. This model was the first main battle tank in the USSR to use a gas-turbine engine. T 80 drawing

http://www.nemo.nu/ibisportal/5pansar/5sidor/5bilder/t802.jpg

http://www.nemo.nu/ibisportal/5pansar/5sidor/5bilder/t80ritn.gif

sapre
01-29-2005, 03:01 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by MZ6:
http://t72.iddk.ru/images/shot_2004_07_20_16_10_47_0051.jpg

In this photo, you can see the tank is a Leopard 1, even admitted by NATO as the equal of a T-72. It certainly isn't an M1A1. I also beleive, like the Sherman v Tiger, a lot of T-72s with well trained troops could take out an Abrams. Besides most of the fighting would occur between similarily equiped former Warsaw Pact units.


Propoganda on either side notwithstanding, I've tried the demo, steep learning curve, but seems pretty sweet. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It's not a matter of skill.
T-72 is completly inferior against Abrams.
It's outranged, outgunned and outarmored.
There was only 6 Abrams that was destroyed in Gulf war, and IIRC, about a year ago in Iraq there was a battle where 6 T-72 attacked a damaged Abrams and all T-72 was destroyed by the crippled Abrams.

Blackdog5555
01-29-2005, 10:04 AM
Clearly, the game has so much "Eastern Propaganda" that it core market is for the Antiamerican rather than Amercian market. It's just laughable to compare a T72 with an Abrams. Might as well compare a La7 with an F16 fighting Falcon. Ok to compare it with a T90 for arguments sake. And yes, a Sherman was a light "medium" tank.. can't really compare it with a Panzer or a Tiger either. BTW there are no tanks made that can hold up completely to modern rocket or missle attacks. none.

chaikanut
01-29-2005, 10:15 AM
How do you kill that sherman in the first T-34 mission? I tried shooting it everywhere; the engine, the back of the turret, the gun, under the skirts, it just laughs at me and finishes me off. The most I have managed is to blow a track.

GoToAway
01-29-2005, 10:39 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Wildcat_zero:
hi

I know its a suprise to you americans but the T-72 is a rather good tank. For one never believe the propaganda, two if the M1A2 arbrams can be knocked out by rpgs, then lends some credence about the low quality of american hardware. Russian tanks have been very good since the T34. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
The T-72 series is a "decent" tank, not a good tank. The T-64 was far superior to the T-72, which is why the Soviets never exported it. The T-72 was much cheaper to build and maintain, so that is the reason that it saw wider service.

The T-80 is the successor to the T-64. The T-80UM1 and T-80UM2 are two of the finest tanks in the world. The Ukrainian T-84 OPLOT is also an incredible tank.

The T-90 is nothing more than a modernized T-72.



As for the site's claim that the T-72s gave a good showing during Desert Storm...
Uh... The vast majority of the Iraqi T-72 fleet wasn't even comprised of Russian tanks. They were bastardized Iraqi-made versions of (as I recall) the T-72M (I believe that they were refered to as "Asad Babyl" or something similar.) They were vastly inferior to their Russian counterparts and fared horribly.

In any case, anything from the T-72 line is going to be inferior to any contemporary western design (M1A2, Leopard 2A6, Challenger 2, LeClerc, etc.) The T-80 line would fare much better.

I'm not saying that the Russians make poor tanks: They make some great tanks. I'm just saying that the T-72 is not a "good tank" in comparisson to western designs. It was never meant to be comparable to western designs. Its entire purpose was to be cheap and easy to manufacture so that it would be profitable to export and so that huge numbers of them could be deployed quickly and cheaply in the event of a war in Europe.

darkhorizon11
01-30-2005, 05:58 PM
That game looks pretty sweet.

As for the tank debate. The Russian tanks are a respectable opponent for a M1A1. In reality however a Russian tank would probably never get anywhere near an Abrams with our air support and reconaissance so it really doesnt matter to much.

whitetornado_1
01-30-2005, 06:38 PM
And that not counting the satellite T.V
for monday night football microwave small
fridge little stove for all the comforts of
home in the M1A2 tank http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

woofiedog
01-30-2005, 07:15 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif darkhorizon11... I would believe that statement would make for a Good Debate.

noshens
01-30-2005, 07:49 PM
downloading the demo http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

ImpStarDuece
01-30-2005, 09:02 PM
I liken the T-72 to the Sherman from WW2. Average all round but outclassed by its opponents in armour, firepower and vulnerability.

Its a mass produced medium tank that benefits from its low production costs, high battlefield numbers and effective combined arms tactics. Its a good adjunct to the 'Russina hordes' school of combat.

What the T-72 is not is an effective main battle tank. Here are just a few reasons why:

The autoloader is notorious for its unreliability and for 'locking' in shells, making it very difficult to quickly change ammo to deal with different targets.

It is very cramped. A T72 has something like 30-40% LESS internal volume than a comparable Western design, even of 60'S vintage.

It has a poor optics and fire control suite. The gunnery and accquisition software on the T-72 is multiple generations behind Western designs,k even though it is catching up fast.

The turret ring holds both the fuel lines and ready stowed ammo. A hit on this section, even a non penetrating but spalling hit, will set off sympathetic explosions.

Similarly the carousel storage of ammo is more vulerable than bustle or 'block' stowed ammo as well as being much more difficult to resupply and load.

There were no spall liners on early models. Admittedly I dont know the details about modernised versions but crews of early versions would of been horribly vulnerable to supersonic armour fragments pinging around the hull. It is afterall a big metal box filled with fuel, ammo and men.

Insufficent gun depression. As it was designed for manouver warfare and NOT for defense the T-72 cannot depress its gun sufficently to fight from dug in positions or on much higher ground. The turret roof is simply too low to allow that much breech elevation.

Underpowered. The T-72 has an 840 Hp engine. Despite its lighter weight compare this to the 1200 found in most modern MBTs and the 1500 found in the Merkava 4, Leclerc, Abrams and Leo 2.

Current T-72s are still vulenrable to top attack EFP (explosively forged projectile such as found on the Tow 2b, Bill and others) missiles and even to mortar fire. The Sweedes have a gerat little partially directed mortar round that willpenetrate the top armour of a T-72, even with ERA.

I could go on but I think i'll pass this ball off to another runner.

Just let it be known though. If you friendly Russian arms dealur comes doorknocking in your neighbourhood with a deal on some used T-72 "only used by the Polish army to drive to the border and back", you what to do. Just say 'nyet' http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

noshens
01-30-2005, 10:51 PM
I just spent 1 hour trying to install the demo that i downloaded from 3d gamers. What do i do after I extract the files into a folder? How do I start it? I've tried clicking on every icon and googling for help, didn't help http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

LuckyBoy1
01-31-2005, 12:46 AM
The T72 tank... the Ronson of the Gulf war!... so I guess he's right, the T-72 did hold a candle to the American tanks... literally! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

MZ6
01-31-2005, 03:26 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by noshens:
I just spent 1 hour trying to install the demo that i downloaded from 3d gamers. What do i do after I extract the files into a folder? How do I start it? I've tried clicking on every icon and googling for help, didn't help http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Open the folder and click START.BAT, I was having problems getting the demo to run until I installed DivX5.1 video drivers

there's more info in this forum http://forum.crazyhouse.ru/viewtopic.php?t=330

anarchy52
01-31-2005, 06:38 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Blackdog5555:
Clearly, the game has so much "Eastern Propaganda" that it core market is for the Antiamerican rather than Amercian market. It's just laughable to compare a T72 with an Abrams. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Absolutelly true.
BTW if You were wondering who the "good guys" are in that sim, browse to the http://www.un.org/icty/.
Most of them are either on trial for war crimes, crimes against humanity or genocide or on the run.
Keywords for googleing if you really want to know more: Vukovar, Srebrenica, Sarajevo, Slobodan Milosevic, Ratko Mladic, Radovan Karadzic.


As for technical credibility: to make a long story short - it's a load of bull$hit.
Modernized T-72s are better but their main deficiency - poor armor protection especially turret was never adequatly solved.

Blackdog5555
01-31-2005, 10:56 AM
Thanks Anarchy52, There is a large faction in the Balkans who view NATO and the West as the bad guys. After all the JNA were only trying to rectify all the evil perpetrated on them by the Ottoman Turks of the year 1389...here is a clip of the history which started the blood fued we call the Balkans...


Quote
The Ottoman Turks had been steadily marching through Asia Minor and the Balkans since the early 1300s. Winning a decisive victory over the Serbs in Kosovo in 1389 and conquering most of the Bulgarian lands as well as its capital Veliko Turnovo by about 1393, the Turks captured the last Bulgarian stronghold of Vidin in the northwest in 1396. Several rebellions against the Turks were put down, and when Constantinople itself fell in 1453, regional hope of continued resistance vanished and five centuries of "The Turkish Yoke" began.

It was the beginning of a bloody and violent era, and some estimate that almost half the Bulgarian population perished in massacres or was carted off to other parts of the Ottoman Empire to be used as slaves. The Turkish governor took up residence in Sofia and Turkish colonists poured in to live on the plains surrounding the city and other prime, fertile land. A more severe system of feudalism was established, whereby Bulgarians who had survived the initial massacres and enslavement were forced to live as serfs of the Spahis, the Turkish knights who were landowners. The government as well as the feudal lords imposed harsh taxes, and the most hated was the devshirme, or "blood tax," where families were stripped of their oldest boys, who were taken away to be trained as janissaries in the Ottoman military. Only pomaks, or those Bulgarians who had been converted to Islam, were exempt" bla bla bla..end quote..

the word Slave..comes from the word Slav..as in Yugoslav.. not many folks know that. Cant blame them for being pissed or having a "grudge"

So we had 1991 Balkan genocide.. 1991 Balkan war and now its 2005 and the "T72 is better than the Abrams" will get its revenge on NATO. most guys will just see a "fun tank shooter". not me..sorry, maybe im too political but I see it as propaganda. excuse my poor typing.
Cheers..I am too old for this shiat. LOL

MZ6
01-31-2005, 02:50 PM
Holy Propoganda indeed, yet we'll fly a FW190 or a BF109 with out problems, or how about the USA, did any US soldier get tried for War crimes after Vietnam, what about the illegal detention of POW in Guantanamo Bay, or how about the 1,000,000+ civilians that have been killed by the US armed froces since WWII, what about the democratically elected gov. in Guatemala, Iran overthrow by the US. If you believe that all this was done for the cause of freedom and democracy, you've been indoctrinated with some heavy propoganda youself.

Propoganda is all around, don't point fingers til you point one at yourself first

indylavi
01-31-2005, 05:38 PM
The T-72 is a good tank. It's not as good as the M1. The reason, M1 is a newer generation. It has electronic sensors and optics that didn't exist when the T-72 was made. A T-80 would be a better comparison. It's like the difference between the F4 Phantom to the F-15. It's also why other tanks have better armor than the M1. The Challenger for example. It obviously should because it's a newer tank. If it didn't than somebody should be fired.

As for the sim I already have it. It's a pretty good sim. I think Steel Beasts is better but overall it's a pretty good product

Xiolablu3
01-31-2005, 11:32 PM
Well Said MZ6, a balanced opinion at last. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Desert Storm was a like Russia taking on a country with a 1970's army. ie. totally mismatched.

If you think the West is immune from propaganda, see the proper pictures from the 'toppling of saddams statue'. All the western films are taken close up so it looks like its packed with people.
Pull the camera back a bit and you can see there are only about 80 people there! It was totally staged.

I even heard that the coalition flew in people oppossed to Saddam especially to make the news report!!

Blackdog5555
02-01-2005, 01:24 PM
MZ6, im sure your a Russian or a Serb. Thats good, Well, the Ruskies and Serbs are great allies. And I am sure from your point of view Serbia was justified in commiting Genocide in the Balkan. The Serbs are pissed off at the Ottoman Turks from what they did in 1386. Im laughing at you bro. Those darn NATO troops stopping your sweet revenge. Hee Hee. The propaganda im refering to is that the nationalistic impression that the T72 is a superior tank to the Abrams. you just look silly saying that. And if you want to talk about atocities. Please. Should we start with Milosovitch and Stalin..Then we can talk about Nixon. ILMAO. Cheers and no hard feelings. Im now going to look at some pictures smoking T72 tanks from the first fulf war now.

MZ6
02-01-2005, 02:34 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Blackdog5555:
MZ6, im sure your a Russian or a Serb. Thats good, Well, the Ruskies and Serbs are great allies. And I am sure from your point of view Serbia was justified in commiting Genocide in the Balkan. The Serbs are pissed off at the Ottoman Turks from what they did in 1386. Im laughing at you bro. Those darn NATO troops stopping your sweet revenge. Hee Hee. The propaganda im refering to is that the nationalistic impression that the T72 is a superior tank to the Abrams. you just look silly saying that. And if you want to talk about atocities. Please. Should we start with Milosovitch and Stalin..Then we can talk about Nixon. ILMAO. Cheers and no hard feelings. Im now going to look at some pictures smoking T72 tanks from the first fulf war now. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

First, I'm Canadian and I never said that the the T72 is as good as an M1, that's just stupid. Also, my intention wasn't to lessen what occured in the Balkans, however, I know a Canadian soldier (one of those darn NATO soldiers) who did a couple tours in the Balkans and I know a Croat who went to fight there and the reports we heard in N.America were hyped to evoke a reponse. Truth is Croats, Serbs and even Bosnians (especially the Al Qaeda operative that were in Bosnia ) all did things that could be considered war crimes. The US too, in Vietnam comitted war crimes, and did you know the that the US did not go to Bosnia until their soldiers were exempted from being charged with war crime (not that they comitted any, but still). The UK can take credit for inventing concentration camps during the Boer War. Even Canada, during WWII, comitted 'atrocities' against SS soldiers after discovering dead toutured Canadian soldiers after Normandy.

The point I was trying to make is that, especially here in the west, we are very fast to point fingers to distance ourselve from such acts even though we are not so innocent ourselves.

P.S. I'm not a US basher, just like to be objective, and as a Canadian of Polish heritage,
I have family and friends who suffered under Stalin, my father was in a German work camp during WWII (credit to the Germans they paid him a pension 'til his death), and one of my grandfathers survived Auswitch. So I have lots of reason to get emotional, but I don't.

MZ6
02-01-2005, 02:57 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
Well Said MZ6, a balanced opinion at last. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Desert Storm was a like Russia taking on a country with a 1970's army. ie. totally mismatched.

If you think the West is immune from propaganda, see the proper pictures from the 'toppling of saddams statue'. All the western films are taken close up so it looks like its packed with people.
Pull the camera back a bit and you can see there are only about 80 people there! It was totally staged.

I even heard that the coalition flew in people oppossed to Saddam especially to make the news report!! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Let's not forget the "Saving Pvt. Jessica" episode, where Iraqi doctors informed the US of her whereabouts and condition. So the US sent in a 'crack' unit of Special Forces to act out a rescue. They didn't even have live ammo, andf if the US asked, the hospital would have driven her to the nearesT US troops. propoganda, propoganda and more propoganda.

Snyde-Dastardly
02-01-2005, 04:33 PM
I thought this was about a tank sim,,,,you boys need to have a cream soda and relax.

MZ6
02-01-2005, 05:19 PM
I agree, but some things should not go unchallenged

Airmail109
02-01-2005, 05:47 PM
Vey good arguments MZ6......its a shame as Im sure you will be flamed now http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif. Ive tried discussing issues only to be flamed by so called patriots calling me lots of rude names. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

Blackdog5555
02-01-2005, 09:23 PM
MZ6.. maybe you need to step back and look at your post. your long rant was nothing but US bashing. Thank you. I am not going to spend much time on this, you and your kind are not worth it. You said it would be "stupid" to say the T72 was a good as a Abrams. let me quote you. MZ6 says:----------------------
"a lot of T-72s with well trained troops could take out an Abrams" &lt;---you talking
-----------------------------------------------
So, I went to the Tank sim's web and read the 3 pages of pure propaganda...Such nonsense it is laugable. (AND READERS; GO TO THE TANK SIMS WEB SITE AND READ THE HISTORY OF THE GAME, you will get a laugh)I stated the game is propaganda and I AM RIGHT. you went on a litany of diatribes of anti American sentiments . OK, so screw-u. I dont believe that you served with NATO. you are too sympathetic to Serbia. Taken by your broken and bad English I doubt that you are Canadian. Your an ex-patriot. You came to the West to bash it. Thats your privilage. You are hiding your anti-American heritage, thats fine too. Who cares. I am still laughing. And you are welcome.

MZ6
02-01-2005, 10:03 PM
<span class="ev_code_RED">a lot</span> of T-72s with well trained troops could take out an Abrams.

A lot meaning more than one. On a one to one basis the M1A1 is clearly superior. However, using tactics similar to those used by US tankers in WWII, a group of T-72s could knock out one Abrams. I don't understand how saying this suggests the two are equal!?

Hendley
02-01-2005, 10:46 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Blackdog5555:
you are too sympathetic to Serbia. Taken by your broken and bad English I doubt that you are Canadian. Your an ex-patriot. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oh, this is too much. PLEASE say this is a troll... No one can be this dense, surely?

Nero111
02-02-2005, 12:57 AM
Mines bigger than yours, no it isnt, yes it is, no it isnt, yes it is.....
Strewth folks, get a grip