Updates in light of Ukraine war

[DRG]

Whatever you see in the OOB's you have is now changed in the master set that IS STILL EVOLVING. The T14 and T15 may indeed never actually see the light of day ( like all the "future weapons systems" a lot of eager beavers insisted should be in the US OOB 20 years ago that all had to be pulled out after they were all cancelled one by one )

SO.The T14 and T15 now have a nominal start date of 6/124 which is GOOD ENOUGH..... anyone unhappy with that can learn to use MOBHack

[DRG]

Anyone interested can go digging for info on the Kurganets 25....... I'm too busy ATM but for now it has the same 6/124 start date as all the other Russian Wunderwaffen


FOR EVERYONES INFORMATION

The T14. T15, Kurganets 25 and the Bumerang IFV have ALL had their start dates pushed into the future. Right now all have 6/124 start dates which differ considerably with what you will see in the OOB's you have

[DRG]

Originally Posted by lansoar

Hi,

How much does the Survivability value play into things?

This is a question that has been asked many times and I will expand on what Andy wrote because I recall walking this path many, many times

Survivability in the game is NOT just about crew survival. That is only the final part.

The Survivability rating relates mainly to what happens after a penetrating hit. The higher the rating the higher the chance the vehicle will take damage rather than being destroyed and that is what those *** you may see when a hit is made but the vehicle continues to function and those *** can cause crew casualties but still the tank can function though it *may* have weapons systems damaged. I am sure if anyone has played the game enough they will have seen their tank take a hit and lose the function of it's main gun.

That is the PRIMARY function of Survivability... the secondary function is related to IF the tank is penetrated and IF it is functionally destroyed what is the chance some or all of the crew might survive.

Anyone who plays campaigns knows that's important. For anyone who only plays single battles it's far less a "concern" but the survival rating affects the vehicle first then the crew

So it's NOT just about "does the crew survive".. it's about how well the tank can cope with penetration and in the cascade of code that is initiated by that event the last calculation is how many crew survive and the higher the survival number the better the chance the tank and the crew survive

It's all explained in the game guide

Survivability


Applies to vehicles only. This number, if greater than zero, indicates both how well the vehicle will survive a penetrating hit but also how likely the crew is to survive and successfully bail out, or bail with less crew killed, when the vehicle is penetrated and destroyed. Larger is better with the maximum number being 6 in winSPWW2 and 7 in winSPMBT where MRAP vehicles are modelled. There is no effect on units that do not have bailing crew (squads, aircraft etc.) but will affect things like bunkers that are crewed

[Aeraaa]

Probably it is too late to ask for something like this but...what about splitting the cost of a tank and the surviving crew in all battles*? This gives an incentive to the player that lost the vehicle but kept the crew to try to save their lives instead of using them as bullet magnets/free scouts.

*say, a 300 cost tank is knocked out but the crew survives. Then, the tank's cost is actually 150, while the crew gets 150 cost value at the same time.

[DRG]

Originally Posted by Aeraaa

Probably it is too late to ask for something like this but..

Not even if I thought it was a good idea.......There will be NO further code changes for this next release

[DRG]

I have started the slow process of building both games update installers so it would take an extraordinary RL event to cause me to interrupt that...... A regiment of T14 Armatas crossing the border into Ukraine would qualify but nothing short of that.

[Wdll]

Originally Posted by zovs66

There will be no T-14s, interesting article and that is the conclusion from the Bulgarian Military.

https://bulgarianmilitary.com/amp/20...MKNtsHsm46JHe8

I'm probably in the minority on this one, but I always thought the T-14 as a BS project. It never felt real, more like a model, a plastic toy for something which doesn't exist.

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

You would think you almost read my mind, I think what you referred to about the USA OOB was our shared ABRAMS NIGHTMARE (Along with a lot of legacy equipment from before Andy and Don took over the game as well., and for what's worth in hindsight for me at least, we are better for it, however I certainly wouldn't want to repeat it.

Wars are never fully included in military budgets they cover costs such as retirements and health care which ALMOST ACCOUNTS FOR AROUND 25 -30% OF OUR DEFENSE BUDGET alone and my pay to .
https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/fi...taryComp_0.pdf
https://crsreports.congress.gov/prod...f/IF/IF11856/1

Some people wish to complain about some NATO countries percent of GDP going to Defense spending if you look at the bottom graph and for now, understand that the U.S. has the largest economy in the world, dollar wise yes by far we spend the most.

But by GDP which is the international standard for determine the "economic power" for a country, most NATO countries aren't really that far off the mark from us by percentage.
https://www.macrotrends.net/countrie...defense-budget

So now Russia has a war, its economy has been severely reduced by sanctions which by about two weeks ago have really started to take hold with more applied since.

So going back to the bottom chart right side from 1960-2019 look at our %GDP for defense and take into account the Cold War (through 1998.), Vietnam, Iraqi & Afghanistan Wars and smaller ops that caused a "blip on the radar" such as Grenada and Panama.

And also recognize, we didn't have any sanctions on us.

So yes, I strongly concur with the "push back" on that Russian equipment they've all suffered from cost over runs (And we know there's no corruption over there.), ongoing technical difficulties etc. etc. This almost makes me to go back and find out how long ago I posted about the "BOOMERANG" that actually was cancelled at least once.

Modern warfare is more expensive now than at any time in our history (Manhattan Project aside based on today's dollars.)

Projects suffer and those projects definitely have.

And finally, because I know someone will say something, this isn't about picking on Russia and it will obviously show you haven't really read some of my stuff, which is perfectly fine, but I'll leave with just one USA project (Don don't get upset-just making a point!) the F-35A/C and finally from my favorite other two countries Turkey ALTAY & India ARGUN Mk II just for good measure.

For those that celebrate it Happy Easter!

Regards,
Pat

[Karagin]

No different really from all the wonderful toys we keep trying to get and sink billions and find out once field they are indeed garbage. Maybe we need to stop painting the other countries as ten-foot-tall giants and remember they have just as many if not more issues than we do and they might not be up there inability. Then again thinking like that is dangerous to the MIC and their lobbyist.

Also in mind, the majority of equipment will always perform differently once in the hand of the soldiers than it does on the test range where things are under full control of those conducting the testing.

Russia has its wonderful toys, if they work then we adjust, if they fail we laugh, just like they do when we (the US or the West) are the ones having the issues. As for the T-14s and others, having them and having them in quantity are two different things.

There is an old sci-fi story, about how this guy is locked in a jail cell with this other guy and he is confessing to the tribunal about how his side lost the war, long story short it was because they got rid of weapons that worked because the geniuses in MIC were always pushing new and better and amazing weapons, and when war came, well these amazing wonderful and better weapons didn't work as well as the older tried and tested system. The story ends with the guy begging to be shot or put in a labor workforce anything but being locked up with the chief MIC genius.

[lansoar]

Originally Posted by Wdll

I'm probably in the minority on this one, but I always thought the T-14 as a BS project. It never felt real, more like a model, a plastic toy for something which doesn't exist.

How so? I understand from an economic viewpoint that there there may be a lack of means to mass produce the vehicle. From a technical standpoint, T-14 appears on paper to be formidable while also promoting crew survivability via an evolved auto-loader mentality. (aka, now the entire turret is unmanned, saving manpower needs). [insert autoloader meme here... . ]

The modular concept I found intriguing, esp the IFV variant though whether that is economically viable was a first counter-thought. Obviously if they can't produce enough MBT versions, thats a problem.