Armour behaviour in FC-2

[DarkFire]

I'm in the process of designing a CAS mission for the Su-25T. As an experiment I set up an engagement of 16 T-72 tanks against 16 T-80 tanks. Having run the mission to the point that the tank groups engage each other, about 5 or 6 times, to my amazement the T-72 group reliably trounced the T-80 group :huh:

 

Both tank groups were set to the same skill levels, both groups were in a line-abreast formation and were on the move at 20km/h.

 

Is this realistic? I would have thought that the better armour and more advanced targeting system on the T-80U would ensure that it comes out on top in such an engagement..? Is there an explanation for this?

 

Second question - is it possible to place a bridge as a static object in the mission editor and then have an armoured column use it to cross a river?

 

Thanks for your time... Awsome series of simms :thumbup:

[combatace]

Both have same modeled gun in FC2 but in real they are different in their auto loader speed and capacity and their storage capacity.

The chassis life set in game from T-80 is 3 higher than T-72 while its armor thickness is the same. So the only way T-80 in FC2 is superior in FC2 is by its chassis life.

[nomdeplume]

is it possible to place a bridge as a static object in the mission editor and then have an armoured column use it to cross a river?

 

Sorry, no. It's also dangerous to have a mission-critical column crossing a river when it may be under attack, as the bridge is very likely to become a victim of 'collateral' damage and once a segment is destroyed, the column will halt.

[DarkFire]

Ah. Thanks for the information. I'm in the middle of designing no.3 in my "Border Patrol" series of missions and I'm experimenting with various CAS scenarios... ;)