Dogs Of War Vu

Welcome => General Discussion => Topic started by: Lumituisku on February 02, 2015, 08:52:18 PM

Title: Random other video clips here.
Post by: Lumituisku on February 02, 2015, 08:52:18 PM

Like this.


Can you any reasonable way explain this without looking at the details of clip? lol. 

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vep7kL1EC0w
Title: "Silly" Movie of how Bradley was developed? O.O
Post by: Lumituisku on February 15, 2015, 06:42:40 PM
Okay more crasy stuff here...

I have feeling that all Bradley lovers will kill me for posting this.


 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aXQ2lO3ieBA


_____________________________________


Just as a counter to what I posted. I found this as well. -  A little bit of love to Bradley.

 http://youtu.be/k3DicKxbQ1o
Title: Re: Random other video clips here.
Post by: Cougar11 on February 17, 2015, 07:50:47 AM
The development of this vehicle is so crazy. You have a vehicle that is louder than a M1, taller than a M1, slower than a M1, cannot withstand enemy fire in contrast to its mission requirements in combined armor operations, and can only carry 4-6 troops. In comparison to the CV-90 and and German PC that can fire ATGMs (cannot think of its name right now), it sucks. Unless you are hidden, you are dead in one of these. The way that they scout without using troops from a turret down position, it can only scout by drawing fire. The Bradley does not like fire, as it usually makes it explode and kill everyone in it. I wish the CV-90 had a ATGM. That would be a nice vehicle to scout, support infantry, and kill the modern tanks. On the other hand if you use the two correctly together, they can be a lethal combination to include the Bradley.

Those that like the Bradley or are on Bradley's, are only on them because they cannot be on a Tank!!!  8)
Title: Re: Random other video clips here.
Post by: Lumituisku on February 17, 2015, 02:19:58 PM

There has been lot discussion in Finnish army of why CV90 doesn't have missile like German marder, bmp serie or Bradley.

In conclusion it comes to something like this.

CV90 is not meant to operate agaisn't tanks. It works with them but not agaisn't them. It is supposed to cover tanks and infantry from other infantry and light vehicles.
As for tanks, or tank combat treat, CV is supposed to carry troops close enough to ambush tanks, and to provide cover and fast retreat for infantry that ambushes tanks with rpg.s or missiles. unlike in steelbeast AT teams actually move really hasty. At least in Finnish army. (Im trained to Heavy basookas there so I know.)

As I see it. Infantry takes out tanks with missiles or basookas, and CV90 moves in to take out rest of the treat while infantry retreats or finds new position to attack.

As addition reasons. CV90 doesn't have missile system since it is slow to deploy and would lead CV90 to be potentially in danger. It is more safe to dismount troops to engage possible treat. Also by this way. Infantry would not be in danger to share hit if cv90 is hit.

As I see it. It is all about tactics. Players probably want to have ability to engage tanks while in vehicle. But at same time take their vehicle in greater danger than in case if they would use infantry to do so. But as well they would likely want to use vehicle rather than infantry since infantry in steelbeast sucks! Beside that I think with right tactics CV90 can still be more than just battle taxi that it seems to be at the moment in steelbeast.

Another thing I hear frequently is that for example bradley or bmp is not NBC protected while loading missiles. Likely cv90 would not be. So that is one more argument why not to have missile. Although well..  one argument there another here. Pros and cons.


Currently in the game CV90 works as good scout vehicle, and "decent" anti air.  Too bad that not many know how to operate CV:s anti air modes.


And for those who hunger CV90 to have ATGM... it has variation for that. Just no one purchased it so far that I know.
 http://youtu.be/sqvQvR8hTiU

Title: Re: Random other video clips here.
Post by: Asid on February 17, 2015, 04:49:45 PM

Like this.


Can you any reasonable way explain this without looking at the details of clip? lol. 

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vep7kL1EC0w

lol very well done...look at the broken concrete around the sub ;)
Title: Re: Random other video clips here.
Post by: Lumituisku on February 17, 2015, 05:45:06 PM
The development of this vehicle is so crazy. You have a vehicle that is louder than a M1, taller than a M1, slower than a M1, cannot withstand enemy fire in contrast to its mission requirements in combined armor operations, and can only carry 4-6 troops. In comparison to the CV-90 and and German PC that can fire ATGMs (cannot think of its name right now), it sucks. Unless you are hidden, you are dead in one of these. The way that they scout without using troops from a turret down position, it can only scout by drawing fire. The Bradley does not like fire, as it usually makes it explode and kill everyone in it.


Hey. My friend Mika found a lot of stuff about Bradley and so on

So I thought you might to like look here too

http://www.oocities.org/armorhistory/infantrytanks.htm (http://www.oocities.org/armorhistory/infantrytanks.htm)

Just one of his finds. there were PDF documents and other too but those are there somewhere. i might ask if he finds those again.