What would happen if in 1988, Soviet Leader Mikhail Gorbachev was assassinated? CNC Fallout is a total conversion mod for Command and Conquer 3: Tiberium Wars that postulates this very question.
Australian MCV
(view original)
Post a comment
very "heavy looking" like it could actually make a base
nice job :D
Ok the Soviet mcv is armed so what does the Aussie mcv gets?
It is faster and cheaper.
(buried)
Fast and cheaper seems like it would fit the soviet union more, but whatever floats your boat.
I'm guessing the nega-Karma is coming from your last statement.
if you had played more games involivng the soviet union they stereotypically have massive bulking units covered in weapons
i agree with maybe cheaper and less advanced but otherwise it doesnt fit
(buried)
So you people know absolutely nothing about real history.
the soviet union had always prefers massive tanks compared to small tanks...Russia today still prefer that......u need to research ur facts before u say something like that
Compare the T-90 to the M1A1, there's a significant difference in size and production cost. Back in the 1940s and 1950s they experimented with a variety of heavy tanks, but ultimately it just came to nothing.
And since this was based on something closer to the 1980s soviet union, there's no way they would have extremely heavy vehicles in active service any longer
I think you sir, need to do some research by making such a ridiculous statement. The soviet union is just made out in the media like that. I'm 90% you've based the soviet union on what you've seen in C&C.
Alright, what i'm trying to say is historically they would have gone with something cheaper that they could easily mass produce, but since this is the C&C series i guess not. I never said the soviet union should have their MCV made faster and cheaper, just that historically they would have...
Or atleast that's what my intentions were. And grim reaper, find me some proof of that.
Well you also have to take into fact that the Soviet union was much more prosperous (until they got killed by the allies) than the real soviet union and Australia is the industrializing superpower at this point so its more like Germany at the beginning of WWII
That is true, but to say the soviet union built and used monstrous tanks on the battlefield is completely incorrect.
oh and one more thing....i have studied the history of most of the major superpowers(if u can consider russia a superpower)on this planet..think before u speak...i might not know evrything but i am big history buff...i studied just about evry war and evry country involved...from the Civil War and up to present...so shut up and think before u speak...the person u are talkin to might just know exactly whats he is talkin about
the t-90 was made after the Soviet Union fell..maybe that is why there different?? take a look at at the KV-2...if u call that little u have serious problems
You're right, it isn't small. However, the soviets considered this tank a failure as it couldn't even climb a hill due to the weight of the turret, hence in any further heavy tank designs they tried to minimise the weight and size.
You may have studied history, but you clearly don't know much about the history of soviet armour.
When it deploys Hugh Jackman comes out in full Wolverine mode
LOL That has got to be a unit!
XD Love it!
hello Henford
what do you think to give Australian MCV the ability to repair vehicles?
To be upfront and honest, I like the design of the MCV...but I'm not so sure it's capabilities aren't making it an inferior clone of the Soviet MCV. As -Goldberg- suggested, fixing vehicles would still make it useful AND work differant from the Soviet MCV, and needs only minor modification to the current model (the (what I can presume is) a Plasma Cannon could be converted to a Repair Crane Arm or a Nano Assembly tool (hey the Aussies already have Plasma Cannons and stuff, why not Nanites?) or something)
Overall, good design, but unsure about the capabilities.
My eyes could be deceiving me but I'm pretty sure that's a crane not a plasma cannon. though it seems incomplete as a crane like it only has one part of the claw.
the only time that they went cheap was in WWII cuz they did not have the resources that they did in WWI or just before WWII....go back before and even in WWII look at some of their tank and sit there and tell me the KV-2 or IS-2 is small...if u do think they're small..then what the hell is a big tank???..the IS-2 was bigger than the King Tiger....
No, the IS-2 was not bigger than the king tiger. You can look that up for yourself. The soviets had some post-war heavy tank EXPERIMENTS but they went any further than that, the soviet union proceeded to go with small and light designs as evident by the use of an autoloader in future designs and the cramped interiors of soviet tanks.
The soviets have never had a preference for heavy tanks, get over it.
That is quite true.
They were based on spamming infantry and tanks to overwhelm the enemy.
Size is a disadvantage in the military.Quality is a different issue.
Size isn't necessarily a disadvantage, think explosives
Size essentially just makes you a bigger target. It doesn't help to have a bigger gun when you're being overwhelmed by several smaller things.
MCV's should take more time to deploy. It's weird when it instantly deploys into a construction yard