This member has provided no bio about themself...
This is the cockpit layout of the F-35:
The F-35 and F-22 both were designed with human interfaces as a primary concern, and have probably the best cockpit layouts in existance. The F-15 was revolutionary due to its excellent electronics, but suffered for the exact same reason-the amount of information available was simply overwhelming to pilots. Pilot skill for the F-15 was mostly measured by how well a person could make sense of the many, many monitors, dials and other sensors while simultaneously being aware of their position in combat. The newer aircraft allow pilots to focus more on combat by greatly condensing sensor outputs and other cockpit functions, and this has been a huge selling point for the military.
Most T-72's still in use are encased in enough ERA that they'll have, at a minimum, a fair chance again most light infantry AT weapons, although generally they would still be worse off than Western tanks.
The Soviets followed a Cold War doctrine of overwhelming enemy ground forces with a large quantity of armor, and as a result their tanks were much smaller, cheaper and lighter than Western tanks (most Western tanks like the Abrams or Leopard II range from about 25%-50% heavier than the T-80 and T-72). While the smaller size of the tanks negates some difference in weight, the Soviet tanks were generally not as well armored as comparable western models.
Arguably this has made Soviet armor not age very well, since the type of large scale ground warfare the T-72 was built for has (thankfully) began to seem unlikely to occur anytime soon.
I think part of the problem with this and the last aircraft is that the wing is too far back for the aircraft to be stable realistically. Consciously or not, people are used to seeing aircraft that have certain layouts, and so it looks strange if those layouts are changed.
I don't care about realism, but following a realistic design can sometimes make things look more appealing.
The one on the left looks like an M36 Jackson. The suspension and turret don't match a Hellcat's and the gun seems too large for it to be an M10.
Yep, the under slung plane is the SpaceShipOne, which made headlines a while ago for making the first privately funded manned spaceflight.
Specifically it's a mod for Battlefield 1942 called Forgotten Hope (v0.7). People still play it apparently, if you're interested in it.
They were always very much at odds ideologically even while they were military allies, so it seems a bit of a stretch for the German's to have allowed any type of parade by the Soviets.
Korea is mostly mountainous and not at all ideal for tank combat, let alone heavy ones, so I wouldn't overestimate the IS-4's usefulness. The Pershing was withdrawn from combat in Korea rather quickly due to being to heavy to properly traverse the terrain, and since the IS-4 was a heavy tank that was dropped primarily due to mobility issues I can't imagine it would have fared any better.
Events like that really don't reflect the greater usefulness of a vehicle. You can take any of the early war heavy tanks-Matilda IIs, Churchill Is, KVs, ect.-and find instances where they seemed like unstoppable beasts, but these events are far outnumbered by the ones were the heavy tanks end up abandoned in a ditch without ever firing a shot.
Ultimately though, the KV2 was a victim of its circumstances. It was a vehicle designed for assaulting hardpoints being operated in a time when the Soviets were doing very few offensive operations. By the time the Soviets' situation improved, German weapons had improved enough that the tank's armor was no longer sufficient to make up for its massive profile, slow speed, and short range.
Aye, no experienced general would do that, but the Soviets had the bad habit of positioning politicians to lead their troops. Voroshilov even stepped it up a notch during the Winter War, by not only sending tanks in alone, he didn't even give them orders for what to do if they broke through(and since Soviet tanks of the era didn't have radios, this meant they just ended up milling around uselessly behind Finnish lines until they were all finally picked off).
Plus, the Russians made the same basic mistake of sending in tanks with insufficient support at Grozny in 1994.
B1's are intended to be used in the way you mentioned, not B2s. B2s are far too valuable for the US to risk in any sort of air-to-air engagement, and the only reason to include B1's is to compensate for the F-35's and F-22's relatively low payload of missiles while stealthed.
Furthermore, the US armed forces have expressed no concern over the ability of the F-22 to handle other air superiority fighters. While Russia and China may be working on their own programs, almost all specific information regarding the F-22 and other modern fighters is classified, the PAK-FA/T-50 is still in the prototyping phase, and almost nothing at all is known about the J-20. There is no way anyone outside of the intelligence community can make any reasonable comparison between these fighters.
I'm assuming he means for export variants, the US obviously has modern equipment for its own tanks.
It used the same round and had very similar performance to the M3 75mm that was used with the Sherman. However, as late war Shermans mostly used the 76mm M1 they had an edge in AP performance.
"Tommy Cooker" was coined as a result of early/mid war Shermans having a slightly higher than average chance of catching fire when hit, Shermans had a superb reliability history with the Western nations that used it. I've never heard of the Soviets having a problem with it, but if they did I would guess it was caused by the weaker training of Soviet drivers(T34s were famously easy to drive, Shermans not so much).
And Soviets crews loved the Sherman, in addition to excellent visibility and a 3-man turret it was practically like riding in a Cadillac when compared to most Soviet tanks. Hell, it even had leather seats.
Basically I can see two advantages of a walker design - the tank could move side to side without turning and it could move better over rock or uneven ground. These things might make a design viable in the future for a very specific use, like mountainous or jungle warfare, but as it is there are just way too many drawbacks to the design.
Pz.IIs saw service throughout the entire war, although they were pretty rare late in it.
This is a Pz.I, not a Pz.II, however. Pz.Is were certainly not a regular site on the battlefield in '44, but they did see sporadic service including about a dozen that saw combat during Normandy. The Germans kept around a lot of these early/pre-war tanks for anti-partisan duties, some of which inevitable saw regular combat.
It's armed with a pair of low caliber MGs, it was obviously never intended to fight other tanks.
It must have really sucked for the crews that were still stuck driving these relics in '44 though.
Actually it's a gigantic girl. Or a very small version of the tank.
You know why these are called UAVs and not RC planes? Because they aren't remotely controlled, they fly themselves. It doesn't need a constant connection to the ground controller, that's only require for it to change what programs it's following. And even in the best conditions, the autopilot controller can't make split second changes, as UAVs are generally controlled from very far from the front line(Nevada, in the case of the US), so there is a significant signal delay.
And plus, there isn't any modern fighter aircraft that could fly through an EMP(good thing they are extremely difficult to make), and electronic warfare aircraft aren't that common these days because they were never particularly effective.
The tendency for the Sherman to catch on fire is grossly exaggerated. For one, it was the first tank to have wet storage for ammunition, and as a result by the end of WWII it was by far the least fire-prone tank in service. Moreover, even early and mid-war Shermans were not significantly more likely to catch on fire when hit than many other tanks, such Panthers.
I can say I see it. The armor layout is completely different, with different turret shapes(one hemispherical, one rectangular) and different philosophies on sloping the front and rear armor(the challenger has a mostly flat glacis plate like that of a Kingtiger or Panther and a rearward sloping back, where as the IS7 has a pointed front like the IS3 and a inward sloping back). Moreover their suspension is completely different.
I really don't see anything significant they have in common...
Seconding that the vast majority of these images look like the result of bombings.
Not this one though, I'm not sure what's going on here... The more I look at this one the more I'm confused. At first I thought the StuG just fell through a bridge, but there isn't anything a bridge would be going over. It looks like it may have partially fallen through and gotten stuck in the roof of some sort of dugout or bunker, but it wouldn't make any sense to drive onto something like that.
It may have driven onto the rubble and then was destroyed by something else, but all the nearby terrain is clear, so it would have been stupid to drive onto a big pile of logs that's likely to damage the vehicles suspension or get it stuck. Plus, it's facing a wall, which it probably wouldn't be doing if it was just trying to cross the rubble, or if it was in combat.
The KV-1/-2 are pretty lower tier, you shouldn't have to grind much to get them. If you save up enough gold to get premium it should only take a few hours of playing.
At least it makes more sense than the ones who don't wear a helmet at all...
Eh? The Sherman is probably the best example of a tank being underestimated, not glorified. When it entered service in North Africa it was far better than the Crusader I/II and Pz.III J/L, the most common tanks of it's class at the time. It was left with the 75mm M3 gun for too long, leaving it underarmed when fighting Panthers and Tigers in Normandy, but by 1945 once it was up-gunned and wet storage of ammunition was adopted it was again a solid tank. The thing showed itself to be effective in combat as late as the 1970's, it was not a bad tank...
As for the main argument, the ME262 was easily one of the best fighters of the war in most combat situations, but as with all early jets its engines gave poor thrust at low velocities, which, as the person under me said, made it very susceptible to being shot down during takeoff and landing.
That was generally how it was used, however while it was okay at suppressing troops in towns and other large targets, it was too inaccurate to be effective against specific strong points such as pillboxs.
Moreover, it could not effectively operate as a normal tank with it's massive profile and what was basically several hundred pounds of explosives sitting unprotected on its roof.
Yes, but it couldn't be used effectively as both a tank and an artillery platform simultaneously. Positioning it as an artillery battery meant it would not see combat on the front line, where the tank could have been useful.
But it also took a otherwise useful tank out of action. The Wurfrahmen 40 launchers the Germans used were more effective, being a similar idea but mounting the rockets on armored vehicles that were not so critical to normal combat.
I'm not familiar with this specific aircraft, but it's clearly powered by a jet engine, not a rocket. Me163s were awful, yes, but had the Soviets been able to build something to rival the Me262, or any of the German jets, I can assure you they would have.
What exactly do you mean by that?
You have me very curious about this.
Heh, those look almost exactly like the ones in Dawn of War.
I suppose it is the same setting though so it makes sense.
It's finished, so while no more work is being done on it it isn't dead.
It's a common problem with shaders that is typically caused by improperly shutting down the game. You should just have to delete BF2's shader cache to correct it.
For specifics of how to fix it it's problem number 2 on this page:
You can't fire well standing up, but guns are insanely inaccurate for about 1 second after going prone, so dolphin diving is quite rare-I think I've only gotten killed once by a dolphin diver since 2.2 came out.
There are also tripod versions of the gun which can be fired standing up, but require the gun to be set up which takes a few seconds.
The physics are just a BF2 engine problem; the devs can't do anything about it. Suppression also used to be a lot more powerful, but it was really obnoxious as 90% of the time you were getting suppressed by guns that weren't even firing at you.
Also, what's unpolished about the infantry combat? In my opinion its the best part of the game,you just need to know what you're doing and have an experienced SL.
Are you playing single player or multiplayer?
I've heard the singleplayer is still a bit buggy on some maps but the multiplayer is very stable in my experience.
A lot of the maps have single player included(I believe 4 of the 7 normandy maps have it). The game is built for multiplayer though so I highly suggest you try that instead.
Except that BF1943 won't have an SDK, and the engine isn't made for 64 players even if it did.
They actually have to make 3 new armies basically. Not much equipment used in North Africa was still in use by the time of the invasion of Normandy, so while a lot of the smaller vehicles can just be reskinned the tanks and infantry are for the most part completely new models.
Visually its spectacular, but I have to admit I'm a little nervous about this being balanced to fit the original factions. The range on the KV-2 is absurdly long even if it takes a long time to reload, and the Katyusha's barrage seems a little bit over the top.
I just have to hope unit caps and cost will work out to keep things balanced.
Is there any way to change the blue decaling on the emplaced AT gun to red? The blue currently clashes a bit with all the other flags and such.
There was an original torrent that was released before the formal release date for 2.15 so servers could prepare and people could start downloading it, and then the password was publicly released a few days later.
Also, the password is :
Dystopia was listed as an honorable mention - that is that it got enough votes to place in the top ten but was ineligible for an award because it had won one in a previous year.
Seems like ISU-122 would be set up like the Jagdpanther is in OF, since it was too rare and too powerful to be a regular unit. A more widely produced tank hunter like the SU-76 would make more sense.
"And in the east, even with the object editor, it would be impossible to animate new tanks, said the panzer generals"
That just made my day.
Usually there's at least one 64player server going every night.
This looks incredible. The Crysis engine looks really perfect for the tribes type of gameplay, though I don't know about how well my computer could handle those huge(and beautiful) maps in the trailer.
Early war WWII is not done nearly enough. Nice to see some good old french tanks in the mix for once.
These should cover the basics-
Unfortunatly there is not any team left to join; I just monitor this page occasionally to answer any questions people have about the hosted files. The forums for the mapping community I am currently in can be found here, though, if you are looking to join a guild:
We don't do a lot of DoW mapping, but there are a few others besides me and its all quite laid back.
just google DC Mod tools or browse around filefront for a bit (they should be under utilities and be by Relic Entertainment, and I think they go up to version 1.2, but I'm not positive.)
The mod tools (including the mission editor)can be found here at filefront.
Depending on your build of DoW you may need more updates, such as the DC mod tools. I always look forward to having more active members of DoW's mapping community, and have fun.
I sorta assumed you did, but I just wanted to make sure. And yeah, we've been around for over a month and haven't finished a single map... we are pretty lazy.
After you download it extract the files from it using WinZip or WinRAR. There's a readme included that willl direct you where to put the specific files.
BIO's computer died, or it at least did enough so that he could no longer run DoW. I thought about continuing this, but since I would have been about the only active member left I just gave up on it. If BIO comes back and wants to start it up again I'll help, but until then it's dead. Oh, and Nid, I'm Nerdsturm at the E-Studios guild thing.
Will you allow mappers to use your custom decals and objects, assuming they give you credit for your creations?
One person did this?! Thats a lot of work to create 31 maps and 200 objects, and I like the idea of adding new enviromental objects since the editior could use some new ones. I especially like the new barbed wire because the two razor wire options in the vanilla game both look really strange. I'm looking forward to this.
No, there is already a map editor for DoW
No, unfortunately I don't think anyone on our team uses SCAR and we generally focus on skirmish maps anyways.