Leo2A4 destroyed

[Aeraaa]

Originally Posted by SaS TrooP

Will the list of "experience/morale to change" be published before the release to possibly discuss it?

Yes, I may have some question regarding some countries.

As of Turkish military power, we should probably ask Greeks and Armenian first who know and fear their possible power. Yet, I somehow believe that Turkish capacity is judged after their fine appearance in Cypriot War of 1974. But we must remember Cypriot military back then was not best either: old equipment, lack of funds to finance organization and training, not to mention internal terrorism problem etc.

Beating Cyprus quickly was not that hard really. Similar story with Iraq. As far as I heard from veterans, Iraqis were feared and treated at equal enemy in 1991. Their quick colapse was a shock for many.

I won't get into details about the military operations in Cyprus, but the whole situation during July-August 1974 was less of a fine demonstration by the Turks and more of a case of "the one who did the least mistakes won".

And there's no comparison with ODS. For one, the Cypriot National Guard did not fall that quickly, or in a bloodless matter.

[SaS TrooP]

But they also made a number of errors, including failure in briging armour to contain the beachhead, inability to deploy artillery quick enough to contain the landing etc.

Needless to say opening moves of that war are on my scenario list, I will go as detailed as I can and you will see by yourself :P

And BTW, war is about making less mistakes rather than being strategic genius. Sun Tsu points it out all the time in his work and life teaches us that whoever disagrees with him... usually dies :P

[Suhiir]

Originally Posted by Aeraaa

I won't get into details about the military operations in Cyprus, but the whole situation during July-August 1974 was less of a fine demonstration by the Turks and more of a case of "the one who did the least mistakes won".

I seem to recall a famous quote to the effect of "making less mistakes then your enemy"

As to the Leo ... every time anything happens you always get someone claiming "The End is Near"! I seem to recall the USA totally gutting it's entire military except the newly independent Air Force because nuclear bombs made everything else obsolete. So excuse me if I have a private chuckle at the doomsayers.

[DRG]

Originally Posted by SaS TrooP

Will the list of "experience/morale to change" be published before the release to possibly discuss it?

Not a chance

I could hand that list to 100 people to adjust and get back 100 different lists and I have no time for endless debate...with the keyword being "endless" and the other being "no time" I'm already working every day just trying to get done the things I want to get done.

The game allows players to adjust either side to suit themselves we provide the "guidelines" for experience and morale from a variety of sources and ways which I can assure you no one will EVER get a consensus on. We knew that when we started and it's still true today

[Wdll]

What I find more interesting than the capabilities of the Turkish army (talking about the game only), is the relatively easy destruction/heavy damage on modern MBTs by a less than proper full conventional army.
What would the results be (in terms of tank losses) if they were fighting an organized (ie state) defenses? If MBTs are so easily destroyed on open ground by light forces, imagine if the opposing force had a regular army. Very interesting.

[DRG]

First off, the 2A4 is not really "modern" .......that tank was 5+ years old when SP2 was released 20 years ago

Two, they are fighting an enemy they cannot deal with in full on conventional warfare terms.... they cannot pacify the area with artillery first and it would appear they don't have enough infantry to keep them safe and it appears they underestimated ISIS ATGM capability.......and it's not a long stretch to see that there are propaganda points to be made when Russian ATGM take out what people are acting like are front line Western tanks...they aren't, they are over 1/4 century old. Nobody batted an eye when ISIS takes out a T-55 or T-72 with an ATGM ...Russian weapons on Russian equipment.... but are with a 25 year old Leo. That tank was designed to defend a 1980's style armoured assult..not wander around in the kind of battlefield in northern Syria and virtually everything is vulnerable to a side shot

[Wdll]

Originally Posted by DRG

First off, the 2A4 is not really "modern" .......that tank was 5+ years old when SP2 was released 20 years ago

Two, they are fighting an enemy they cannot deal with in full on conventional warfare terms.... they cannot pacify the area with artillery first and it would appear they don't have enough infantry to keep them safe and it appears they underestimated ISIS ATGM capability.......and it's not a long stretch to see that there are propaganda points to be made when Russian ATGM take out what people are acting like are front line Western tanks...they aren't, they are over 1/4 century old. Nobody batted an eye when ISIS takes out a T-55 or T-72 with an ATGM ...Russian weapons on Russian equipment.... but are with a 25 year old Leo. That tank was designed to defend a 1980's style armoured assult..not wander around in the kind of battlefield in northern Syria and virtually everything is vulnerable to a side shot

ok I am curious, which MBTs do you consider as modern? Aren't all of them at least 20 years in development in one way or another?

I hope you are not implying that my comment is part of some propaganda against western tanks, because you would be way off. way way way off.

Do you consider the (export versions or not) T-55 and T-72 as the same....I don't know....tier? as the Leopard 2A4? That would be an interesting way of seeing things.
But that's your prerogative.

Having lone tanks in towns sounds like suicide, but that is not always (ever?) the case. At least from photos I have seen, they appear to be on open ground. The question is, where was the protection and/or fire support of those units? (talking about the Turkish units in this case).
If any of the destroyed/captured tanks were inside towns etc, who sends them there in the first place and if for some reason they do, shouldn't they have far more support? Turkey has a large army, is it like the second largest in NATO? They surely can afford (units/men) to send more than 2-3 tanks at a time.

I don't know. The whole thing stinks. Either a setup or useless command.

[Aeraaa]

Originally Posted by Wdll

Do you consider the (export versions or not) T-55 and T-72 as the same....I don't know....tier? as the Leopard 2A4? That would be an interesting way of seeing things.

Well the devil is in the details. No version of T55 is even close to a Leo-2A4, but there are several versions of the T72 that are comparable, or even superior to the Leo-2A4 (T-72B3M for example). The newest generation of Leos (Leo-2A5, Leo-2A6, not to mention the A7 version) are better than most T72s lying around*, but Turkey does not have any of these models.

Most "modern" tanks in service now are actually product of the 70ies. Some notable exceptions are the South Korean K2 or the brand new T-14 Armata.

*though technically, the T90 is in fact an upgraded T72.

[IronDuke99]

From what I have read and looked at the loss of these tanks looks down to poor tactics and training as much as anything else and, perhaps, command in terms of lack of support troops.

If you put enough vehicles in harms way, even MBT's some will get hit and some will get knocked out, especially given this version of the Leopard 2 is not as heavily protected as later versions.

[DRG]

Originally Posted by Wdll

ok I am curious, which MBTs do you consider as modern? Aren't all of them at least 20 years in development in one way or another?

The 2A4's Turkey has were front line equipment in the early 90's and development has moved on which is why there have been 2A5's 2A6's and 2A7's since then

Originally Posted by Wdll

I hope you are not implying that my comment is part of some propaganda against western tanks, because you would be way off. way way way off.

No......... but certain arms manufacturers and nations might think putting an ATGM into them might be since most tanks destroyed in this conflict have been Russian in origin and the Leo has been long touted as a top line tank......it was ....in 1990 ....and is as a 2A7 , not so much as an early 90's vintage 2A4 in 2016 with no active or passive anti-ATGM countermeasures.

Originally Posted by Wdll

Do you consider the (export versions or not) T-55 and T-72 as the same....I don't know....tier? as the Leopard 2A4? That would be an interesting way of seeing things.
But that's your prerogative.

It makes little difference what the tank is when the side armour is less than the penetration of the missile hitting it....does it ? The Leo's crew would have a better chance of getting out but that's about all. The T-55 was wonderful....in 1960....not so much in 2016 against any ATGM