major mistake in Romanian OOB

[CrnaStrela]

The mistake is major because it concerns Romania's main battle tank and this puts the Romanian player at a serious disadvantage.

But before I go into the thick of it, it would be nice to have the TR-85 M2 removed from the Romanian OOB completely because this upgrade hasn't been done yet (if ever) and we don't know the specs (the ones in v.2.5 are a bit on the ridiculous side too)... Actually I don't think Romania is done upgrading its TR-85 to M1 yet. So it would be great to have only M1 for now. Anyway, below is the TR-85 M1 file from v.2.5



First off (and not a disadvantage at all) the penetration figure for its main gun under APCR is a bit higher than in reality. The correct number should be 450mm instead of 470mm. Jane's puts its optimal penetration at 45cm at 1km Just nitpicking.

Next is the armour protection which seems to be extremely low in v.2.5. SP:MBT puts the front turret at 270mm against KE while sources indicate 580mm and this makes sense because tr-85 m1 is heavier than any Russian T-XX tank... here's a table from wikipedia. check the weight and armour...



So in SPMBT it doesn't even have half the real protection. Somehow SPMBT treats TR-85 M1 as a generic T-55 in this aspect but you can clearly see from pictures that M1 is very beefed up in terms of armour protection, to the turret and hull as well.



Fire control is also too low. Actually the only good thing about this tank is its modern FCS because otherwise it's undergunned and its armour protection is average at best, even at 580mm KE.

More info on its FCS:

The electronics are vastly improved ( in fact no fielded T72 has such modern electronics , only the latest prototypes ) , it has a top notch computerised fire control system , CICLOP M , with a laser designator and passive night vision equipment ( 2000m capable at night ). The system is able to continously engage targets at over 4000m with the latest APFSDS rounds.Aiming devices and sights have alse been replaced.

From the manufacturer

The upgraded of the Romanian TR-85 tank consist in increasing fire power and penetration, more maneuverability, fire control system CICLOP-M with night-time passive imagine intensifier or termovision.

Effective weapons:

o High lethality against all target types, due to APFSDS rounds and firing range
o Day and night sighting system infrared /light intensifier
o Stabilized and accurate gun
o Modern fire control system



Improved survivability:

o Additional passive armour
o Laser illumination warning sensors
o Rapid fire suppression system
o NBC protection
o Flare / Smoke grenades launcher



Improved mobility:

o Modern, powerful engine and transmission
o Hydro-gas shock absorbers
o Effective suspension
o Two - bolt tracks

considering this FC and vision should be higher than 20... even a generic T-55 has 20 vision...

please post your thoughts

[CrnaStrela]

video of TR-85 M1 during military exercise

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jaOtWHI63Hc

[CrnaStrela]

Is support for the game dead?

In any case, THIS forum is dead.

By the way, why does the MLI 84 have only 5 FC? This must be a mistake. BMP-2 has 15 an it's almost 40 years old. The MLI 84 was just recently fit with a modern Israeli OWS-25R turrent. The vision may also pose a problem because the manufacturer of OWS-25R says that the turret system comes with an optional thermal imager. MLI-84 has 30 vision but in game terms thermal imager increases that number to 40 but I'm not sure if the deal included thermal images. I will try to find out.

[RecruitMonty]

Just change it yourself. Go into Mobhack and do it. I did all my changes personally.

[CrnaStrela]

if everyone fixed the oobs by themselves no one would ever be able to play by e-mail due to the huge amounts of different oobs. that's why there is or should be a dev team that takes care of these things. it's pretty frustrating to PBEM and your MBT has 2 1/2 times less protection than in real life and piss poor vision and FC... might as well just buy a T-55!

[narwan]

If you'd be paying attention you'd know the developers have recently been extremely busy with WinSPWW2. They have also made clear a general update for WinSPMBT is scheduled for this (late) fall. Small issues like this may very well be included in that update.
But give them some time will you? They've worked back to back on both WinSPMBT and WinSPWW2 and are now in need of a break. And just in case you didn't know, this is not the regular job of the developers. They do this as a 'hobby' on the side.

Do try to make it easy on the developers; that includes providing data, links and credible sources. It's nothing personal, it's just we can't assume that everyone who claims something isn't right knows their stuff. Too often it turns out they didn't and doublechecking claims takes far too much time. Wikipedia and manufacturers data are a start but not the most reliable of sources...
Still, I'm confident this will get looked at in due time. In the meanwhile, the more accurate data you can provide, the more likely it is that this will be changed in the revision.

Narwan

[CrnaStrela]

I don't need an any more credible source... it's obvious using logic that the numbers in SPMBT are not correct

The TR-85 M1 followed this lineage T-55 - TR-580 - TR-85 and finally TR-85 M1

In SPMBT, TR-85 M1 has roughly the same specs as a generic T-55 which shouldn't be the case after all these upgrades

A T-55 weighs 36 tons... while a TR-85 M1 weighs 54 tons!

actually TR-85 M1 weighs more than T-55, T-62, T-72, T-80, T-90..... but it'S given the same piss poor armour protection of the first T-55 in SPMBT....

580mm against SABOT at front turret is the ONLY number I've seen so far... so how the 270mm (in SPMBT) came to be is still a mystery to me

but you can simply tell from the pictures that TR-85 M1 has far more armour protection than the general T-55.....



and the vision and FC is not correct also imo

the T-55 has 20 vision, same as TR-85 M1 in SPMBT

but M1 has modern CICLOP FCS with laser ranger finder (T-55 did not), day and night image intensification (T-55 did not) and a computer.. as far as I know T-55's FCS was mechanical, different gun mount for better accuracy.. and other improvements.

30 vision and 30 FC is what it should be

anyway, I am just trying to raise the attention to this unit

btw, MLI 84 vision is correct at 30..I checked Puma and Achzarit stats in SPMBT (all 3 units have the same kind of turret) and they're at 30 too, but why is the MLI 84 fire control 5 only?

[Mobhack]

Points made here do get noted, but individual answers may not be made.

In any case, your posts seem to be a repeat of this existing thread on the Romanian OOB Link which has already replied to by Don.

Perhaps it would have been better to append your requests to the end of the existing thread on the same subject matter, instead of creating a duplicate?. (There is a "search" function available at the top right of the message board which makes it easy to check existing messages on a subject)

Cheers
Andy

[CrnaStrela]

many apologies Andy and Don..
if I have any other things to report I will do so in the other thread but I hope it's ok to bother you one last time with a question...
will there be any more support to SPMBT after version 3?? if yes for how long do you think. I ask this because I want to go through the Algerian and Romanian OOBS thoroughly and note down errors, possible new additions like T-72M4 CZ and S-300 PMU2 for Algeria, or BTR 80 (OWS 25R) and LAROM MRLS firing the heavier 160mm LAR israeli rockets for Romania

and clean (erase useless stuff)

btw, I can'T thank you enough for the efforts you, Don and others put in this game

[Mobhack]

You dont "erase" any "useless" stuff, not unless you are willing to check each and every scenario, including those in user campaigns, just in case that unit has been used. And even if you get all the official scenarios and campaigns - some third party scenario or user campaign may well have used that unit.

If you have any further suggestions,, feel free to add them to an appropriate thread.

Whenever we get round to the MBT patch (which wil likely be 3+ months or so from now, we are taking a break), we will look at these and if they seem reasonable and are supported by facts (websites, etc) they may get into the patch. But we will not be getting into any blow-by-blow detailed discussions about any such requests.

Or, you can produce your own edited OOB and post it here, as many have done. However, we will not be going through such OOBs ourselveslooking for changes (it's simply too much effort to pick through an undocumented end-user OOB, quite frankly).

Cheers
Andy