Advertisement
by New Vihenia » Sat Jul 18, 2015 8:36 am
by The Teutonic Republic » Sat Jul 18, 2015 8:58 am
Gallia- wrote:rl tanks are meant to look cool too
by The Kievan People » Sat Jul 18, 2015 9:04 am
The Teutonic Republic wrote:Anyways some RTS vidya have realistic-ish vehicle designs. The Europeans and JSF from Endwar come to mind as do the Americans from CnC generals.
by Takistan DR » Sat Jul 18, 2015 9:05 am
by Fordorsia » Sat Jul 18, 2015 9:05 am
The Teutonic Republic wrote:On an unrelated note how practical is it to have your IFV double as a SPAAG?
San-Silvacian wrote:Forgot to take off my Rhodie shorts when I went to sleep.
Woke up in bitches and enemy combatants.
Crookfur wrote:Speak for yourself, Crookfur infantry enjoy the sheer uber high speed low drag operator nature of their tactical woad
Spreewerke wrote:One of our employees ate a raw kidney and a raw liver and the only powers he gained was the ability to summon a massive hospital bill.
Premislyd wrote:This is probably the best thing somebody has ever spammed.
Puzikas wrote:That joke was so dark it has to smile to be seen at night.
by The Teutonic Republic » Sat Jul 18, 2015 9:27 am
by Husseinarti » Sat Jul 18, 2015 9:29 am
The Teutonic Republic wrote:The Kievan People wrote:
No. Just no.
????
The JSf artillery is the prototype N-LOS , their IFV is basically the XM1206, their transport heli is a futurized v-22, and their strike fighter is pretty much a dressed up f-22. The EU artillery is basically the archer, their cargo helicopter is a modernized chinook, and their fighter is an updated version of the dassault rafale. Even some of the Russian stuff is passable for RL designs. Their attack heli is a ka-50, their transport heli is an mi-24, and their strike fighter is an su-47.
As for the Americans from CnC Generals most of their stuff is actual US military equipment. Pretty sure that counts as "realistic" although all the laser cannons and the particle beam superweapon seem a bit far-fetched.
by The Teutonic Republic » Sat Jul 18, 2015 9:36 am
Husseinarti wrote:The Crusader Tank from C&C is a single manned design, the crewman sits in the hull of the vehicle operating the entire system.
Its highly impractical.
Also Laser Avenger is a real thing.
Fordorsia wrote:
Not at all. SPAAGs need a lot of ammo, which they wouldn't have if they carried troops.
by Imperializt Russia » Sat Jul 18, 2015 9:44 am
Also,Lamadia wrote:dangerous socialist attitude
Imperializt Russia wrote:I'm English, you tit.
by The Teutonic Republic » Sat Jul 18, 2015 9:48 am
Imperializt Russia wrote:Are you familiar with Swiss Army Knife Syndrome?
Your IFV has IFV things to do. It does not need SPAAG capabilities. It should have a 20-40mm gun with FCS that may be able to harass low-flying aircraft. It should have some description of heavy machine gun that may be able to harass low-flying aircraft. It should have some description of ATGM, which may be able to harass low-flying aircraft.
If you desperately want try AA capabilities, strap a MANPADS in the weapons locker for the dismounts to use. I would personally argue against this - I don't think the infantry section has much business waving around that kind of hardware. Leave it to dedicated units with dedicated systems.
by Husseinarti » Sat Jul 18, 2015 9:50 am
by The Akasha Colony » Sat Jul 18, 2015 12:02 pm
The Teutonic Republic wrote:True, I was just thinking since it already has a fast-firing autocannon it wouldn't be a huge stretch to give it SPAAG capabilities. Would something more logical be to make a dedicated SPAAG/SHORAD version of the IFV kind of like the m6 linebacker or CV9040 AAV?
The Teutonic Republic wrote:The JSf artillery is the prototype N-LOS , their IFV is basically the XM1206, their transport heli is a futurized v-22, and their strike fighter is pretty much a dressed up f-22. The EU artillery is basically the archer, their cargo helicopter is a modernized chinook, and their fighter is an updated version of the dassault rafale. Even some of the Russian stuff is passable for RL designs. Their attack heli is a ka-50, their transport heli is an mi-24, and their strike fighter is an su-47.
As for the Americans from CnC Generals most of their stuff is actual US military equipment. Pretty sure that counts as "realistic" although all the laser cannons and the particle beam superweapon seem a bit far-fetched.
by The Teutonic Republic » Sat Jul 18, 2015 12:11 pm
The Akasha Colony wrote:
If only. Just carrying the name and general aesthetic of IRL vehicles doesn't make them "realistic." In fact, that's the exact problem people in this thread are so used to encountering. People who play these games, see that IRL vehicle names are tossed around, and then start thinking that this is how these pieces of equipment, and warfare in general, actually works. Then they come here and post a list of their vehicles taken from the game, extolling how they work according to game physics with things like "balance" and "rushing."
That somehow tanks don't bother using their machine guns against a horde of infantry that stand stock still and pummel it with their rocket launchers.
Gatling guns that require like 30 seconds to "spin up" to their maximum speed (wat).
Folding artillery barrels on a chassis that clearly isn't NLOS-C but is called NLOS-C anyway and gets random rocket pods attached (what happened to M270? Or NLOS-LS if you want to be all FUTUR).
Using a platform that was never designed for ground attack and was instead highly specialized as an air-to-air platform as a dedicated ground attack aircraft. There are a whole host of better ideas out there, but of course a futurized F-22 looks cool in marketing so let's go with that one. And for Europe how about a Rafale with LAZERS?
tl;dr: There's more to "realism" that copying a name and a vague aesthetic. Just because you have a tank with angled faceplates and called it an "Abrams" doesn't make it "realistic."
by The Soodean Imperium » Sat Jul 18, 2015 12:17 pm
The Teutonic Republic wrote:I'm going to clarify my earlier post and say that I meant" realistic" as in purely the visual design, not the function.
by The Teutonic Republic » Sat Jul 18, 2015 1:20 pm
The Soodean Imperium wrote:Here is a tank from Red Alert.
- It has non-split treads
- It has an engine (presumably it's in there somewhere)
- It has a one-gun turret
Yet these very fundamental features don't make it "realistic."
The problem with Endwar specifically is precisely that most of its equipment is a vague copy of a real-life design or prototype, often slightly out of proportion, which is then "futurized" through the addition of superfluous features that don't contribute to much other than aesthetics.
by The Akasha Colony » Sat Jul 18, 2015 1:32 pm
The Teutonic Republic wrote:The Soodean Imperium wrote:Here is a tank from Red Alert.
- It has non-split treads
- It has an engine (presumably it's in there somewhere)
- It has a one-gun turret
Yet these very fundamental features don't make it "realistic."
The problem with Endwar specifically is precisely that most of its equipment is a vague copy of a real-life design or prototype, often slightly out of proportion, which is then "futurized" through the addition of superfluous features that don't contribute to much other than aesthetics.
yeah but when you look at any tank from red alert you think "hey that looks pretty silly or cartoonish" but when you look at say the m5a2 from endwar it's more along the lines of "hey that looks like a real tank". Again both are video games with art designers that probably aren't engineers so you're bound to have stuff that looks cool rather than stuff that's actually sound from an engineering or tactical point of view. My point is that there are a few RTS games that have units that could visually (not functionally) pass as designs for real-world vehicles.
by Husseinarti » Sat Jul 18, 2015 1:33 pm
The Teutonic Republic wrote:The Soodean Imperium wrote:Here is a tank from Red Alert.
- It has non-split treads
- It has an engine (presumably it's in there somewhere)
- It has a one-gun turret
Yet these very fundamental features don't make it "realistic."
The problem with Endwar specifically is precisely that most of its equipment is a vague copy of a real-life design or prototype, often slightly out of proportion, which is then "futurized" through the addition of superfluous features that don't contribute to much other than aesthetics.
yeah but when you look at any tank from red alert you think "hey that looks pretty silly or cartoonish" but when you look at say the m5a2 from endwar it's more along the lines of "hey that looks like a real tank". Again both are video games with art designers that probably aren't engineers so you're bound to have stuff that looks cool rather than stuff that's actually sound from an engineering or tactical point of view. My point is that there are a few RTS games that have units that could visually (not functionally) pass as designs for real-world vehicles.
by The Teutonic Republic » Sat Jul 18, 2015 1:39 pm
The Akasha Colony wrote:
And what point is this supposed to make?
by Immoren » Sat Jul 18, 2015 1:48 pm
New Vihenia wrote:well... for coolness.. i would love to adopt Ob-477 "Molot" as my nation's 1980-early 1990 tank.
discoursedrome wrote:everyone knows that quote, "I know not what weapons World War Three will be fought, but World War Four will be fought with sticks and stones," but in a way it's optimistic and inspiring because it suggests that even after destroying civilization and returning to the stone age we'll still be sufficiently globalized and bellicose to have another world war right then and there
by New Vihenia » Sat Jul 18, 2015 1:56 pm
by Immoren » Sat Jul 18, 2015 1:57 pm
discoursedrome wrote:everyone knows that quote, "I know not what weapons World War Three will be fought, but World War Four will be fought with sticks and stones," but in a way it's optimistic and inspiring because it suggests that even after destroying civilization and returning to the stone age we'll still be sufficiently globalized and bellicose to have another world war right then and there
by Husseinarti » Sat Jul 18, 2015 2:01 pm
by The Teutonic Republic » Sat Jul 18, 2015 2:03 pm
by Imperializt Russia » Sat Jul 18, 2015 2:12 pm
Also,Lamadia wrote:dangerous socialist attitude
Imperializt Russia wrote:I'm English, you tit.
by The Teutonic Republic » Sat Jul 18, 2015 2:21 pm
Advertisement
Return to Factbooks and National Information
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
Advertisement