Was any reason why 7 Panzer lost its only 2275 tanks?

[ChargingSnail]

As title says.

[Urk_da_WAAAGH!]

To "make it unique"

[ChargingSnail]

Originally posted by Urk_da_WAAAGH!:

To "make it unique"

Probably to makec it the only tank division which can be beaten by french tank division. (^^)

[Dekillos]

The 7th Division lost one of its two good units, the second one became more expensive (MiG-21HE). The division has lost all variability in deck construction.The T-72 is an absolutely garbage unit and mixing it with the T-55AM2 saved the situation. I hate this update.

[ChargingSnail]

Originally posted by Dekillos:

The 7th Division lost one of its two good units, the second one became more expensive (MiG-21HE). The division has lost all variability in deck construction.The T-72 is an absolutely garbage unit and mixing it with the T-55AM2 saved the situation. I hate this update.

Yup, mixing those two was a way to go. At least to some degree, aginst Abams, Leo 2 not so much.

[Sneaky_Beaky]

I redouble my suggestion of swapping T-55 to T-62 line.

[Ricktastic]

As far as I understand, they wanted to increase the number of T-72 tanks in the deck. Historically speaking 7. Panzer never used T-55AM2 tanks. Only the regular T-55A to support their T-72M.

I also do not appreciate the removal of all T-55AM2, but they could at least give us 4 x T-72M and 2 x T-72M1 to at least somewhat compensate.

Another reason might be to improve and differentiate 4th Moto. Division.

[ChargingSnail]

Originally posted by Ricktastic:

As far as I understand, they wanted to increase the number of T-72 tanks in the deck. Historically speaking 7. Panzer never used T-55AM2 tanks. Only the regular T-55A to support their T-72M.

I also do not appreciate the removal of all T-55AM2, but they could at least give us 4 x T-72M and 2 x T-72M1 to at least somewhat compensate.

Another reason might be to improve and differentiate 4th Moto. Division.

Well I can get along with real equipement argument but lack of 2275 gun tank hurts.

[Catiline]

Originally posted by ChargingSnail:

Originally posted by Ricktastic:

As far as I understand, they wanted to increase the number of T-72 tanks in the deck. Historically speaking 7. Panzer never used T-55AM2 tanks. Only the regular T-55A to support their T-72M.

I also do not appreciate the removal of all T-55AM2, but they could at least give us 4 x T-72M and 2 x T-72M1 to at least somewhat compensate.

Another reason might be to improve and differentiate 4th Moto. Division.

Well I can get along with real equipement argument but lack of 2275 gun tank hurts.

ridiculous that the 125mm doesnt have full range on the m's at least

[Abashed the Devil Stood]

Originally posted by Catiline:

Originally posted by ChargingSnail:

Well I can get along with real equipement argument but lack of 2275 gun tank hurts.

ridiculous that the 125mm doesnt have full range on the m's at least

iirc they don't have the full range is an abstraction for DDR T-72Ms not having the gunnery computers that can be found in the T-80 line.

[ChargingSnail]

Originally posted by Milk Dribbler:

Originally posted by Catiline:

ridiculous that the 125mm doesnt have full range on the m's at least

iirc they don't have the full range is an abstraction for DDR T-72Ms not having the gunnery computers that can be found in the T-80 line.

Well, laser rangefinder allows to shoot at 2275 distance in the game. The lack of FCS is shown by lower acc than T-80 series.

[Urk_da_WAAAGH!]

Originally posted by ChargingSnail:

Originally posted by Milk Dribbler:

iirc they don't have the full range is an abstraction for DDR T-72Ms not having the gunnery computers that can be found in the T-80 line.

Well, laser rangefinder allows to shoot at 2275 distance in the game. The lack of FCS is shown by lower acc than T-80 series.

His explanation is the one the devs used. If we speak of logic of course 2275 meters is perfectly doable for the T-72M and T-72M1 as scattering wouldn't be a big issue for their Laser Rangefinder at such relatively small range.

But we are talking about a game that the T-80B somehow has worse accuracy than western tanks and since last patch not only it but less stabilization what is absurd if we think that it had not only automatic lead but two plane sight stabilization.

So we don't discuss logic against Eugen, we leave them to make those decisions and suck it up when they "fix" something that wasn't broken.

Edit:

This range can be modified by two elements: laser rangefinders, allowing for quick, accurate range measurement, and automatic fire control computers. These two technologies came to fruition in the Cold War, resulting in more advanced sensor input to improve tank accuracy.

The above, in WARNO’s case, directly impacts the range of a tank gun.

Baseline tank range is 1925 m.
Having a Laser Rangefinder allows for a 2100 m range.
Having an Automatic Fire Control Computer allows for a 2275 m range.


ACCURACY
Already touched upon, but there was a host of other tech and equipment that could influence the accuracy of a tank gun. The following influences the general accuracy found on a WARNO’s tank:

Coincidence Rangefinder.
Stereoscopic Rangefinder.
Meteosensor.
Fire Gating.
Manual Entry Ballistic Calculator.
Muzzle Reference Sensor/ Thermal Cowling.

[ChargingSnail]

Originally posted by Urk_da_WAAAGH!:

Originally posted by ChargingSnail:

Well, laser rangefinder allows to shoot at 2275 distance in the game. The lack of FCS is shown by lower acc than T-80 series.

His explanation is the one the devs used. If we speak of logic of course 2275 meters is perfectly doable for the T-72M and T-72M1 as scattering wouldn't be a big issue for their Laser Rangefinder at such relatively small range.

But we are talking about a game that the T-80B somehow has worse accuracy than western tanks and since last patch not only it but less stabilization what is absurd if we think that it had not only automatic lead but two plane sight stabilization.

So we don't discuss logic against Eugen, we leave them to make those decisions and suck it up when they "fix" something that wasn't broken.

I would gladly trade -1 front armor for both M T-72 for those additional 175m of range.

[Urk_da_WAAAGH!]

Originally posted by ChargingSnail:

Originally posted by Urk_da_WAAAGH!:

His explanation is the one the devs used. If we speak of logic of course 2275 meters is perfectly doable for the T-72M and T-72M1 as scattering wouldn't be a big issue for their Laser Rangefinder at such relatively small range.

But we are talking about a game that the T-80B somehow has worse accuracy than western tanks and since last patch not only it but less stabilization what is absurd if we think that it had not only automatic lead but two plane sight stabilization.

So we don't discuss logic against Eugen, we leave them to make those decisions and suck it up when they "fix" something that wasn't broken.

I would gladly trade -1 front armor for both M T-72 for those additional 175m of range.

I would gladly trade having worse max range accuracy for having those tanks at least answer fire.

[Abashed the Devil Stood]

Regardless, T-72s aren't meant to be used to face off against other tanks at 2275ms like a Leo2a4 or T-80UD. The base model is fire support for your inf and the M1s are a wolfpack on tracks, you use them in groups of 3 to ambush, side-shot and harass bigger tanks.

[Urk_da_WAAAGH!]

Originally posted by Milk Dribbler:

Regardless, T-72s aren't meant to be used to face off against other tanks at 2275ms like a Leo2a4 or T-80UD. The base model is fire support for your inf and the M1s are a wolfpack on tracks, you use them in groups of 3 to ambush, side-shot and harass bigger tanks.

Your logic failed a bit here.

I'm pretty sure the T-55AM2 weren't used for facing T-80UD, Leopards 2a4 too. Actually, I'm damn sure that not even several other tanks with this range are meant to face those what already make your argument very weak.

But the continuation is even more absurd, Base Model is fire support? Well, ALL of them are fire support, no almost no tank in the game is meant to be a tank killer, thatbis the function of ATGM carriers usually.

You failed to notice that such issue was only brought once the updated T-55 were removed from the division, everyone playing 7th usually mixed their T-72 with some T-55 to have a balanced force fielded, that's already a more advanced tactic in the game than your proposed "ambushing wolfpack".

Talking about ambushing, of course not everyone knows but it is a mostly known fact that using them on ambushing instances increase their survivability, positioning them a few in game meters inside forests for example will make it so they only can get targeted by something that is on their own LoS and range as opposed to on the edges where they can be easily spotted and picked by ATGMs. So again, the argument isn't about this, is about something else.