That's strategy. Tactics are in battle commands, such as retreating in reverse, so your weak rear armor isn't exposed. 
Xer0 \^/
I wilth now convert my lines into more knightly banter. BYeth the way, I did not quoteth but perhaps another has spoken these words before me.
In wareth what weth call underhanded and unknightly conduct are called battle plans
Thine rant and banter is quite preposterous in it's form and style. Thou mustn't be unsightly and unkempt whilst thou art speaking thine language of thou kings.
Xer0 \^/
Verily I must agree with you, however I would be glad if though would forgive thine disgretion as I wast still only in an introductory phase
Meh, I'm off for tonite as well. 6 hours of sleep and no food does NOT make Dakota a happy boy.
Xer0 \^/
Do keep in mind that the back of the turret on WWII tanks deflect incoming tankshells, regardles of trajectory.
Not all tanks had the deflector, but yeah, you're right.
"Successful Troll is Successful"
Meanwhile, you've got the modern British Challenger 2 tank, which is effectively a mobile pillbox.
I could go on and on about British army stuff, believe me...
Limey Man: I do believe this knightly banter is intruding on my monopoly of this establishment's upper-class talk.
ok im on for an hour and then i wont be on unless i get any "homework" from school comme on two blocks left i know there homework
read this guys fan book on home world there 2 book and there good
But British gear still gets pwned by American stuff because there are more Americans. And we all know that the Germans and the Russians are ALWAYS going to be major leaders (because the Germans can come up with some of the coolest shit imaginable and the Russians can mass produce some of the coolest shit imaginable).
"I don't grin like a moron, I grin like a sociopath." | REJOICE FRIENDS, FOR THE SHADOW IN THE WARP APPROACHES
Fortunately we don't plan on fighting Russians, Americans, or Germans, mainly because two of them have nukes, and we're bored of fighting Germany. To be honest, the country that NATO is most likely to fight is Iran, but that'll be with cruise missiles to eliminate any nuclear threat, then cleaning up the Revolutionary Guard and trying to create a democracy (which will collapse the moment we pull out)
And about Germans making up cool stuff, I totally agree. Look at the V2! It was the first cruise missile, the prototype for the spaceship... Having been born in Germany (but with British parents, so yes I am still British. I have papers and everything, don't arrest me!) I can still take pride in their stuff too.
TBH, I think alot of the "whose guns are better" arguments are pretty pointless. Each country follows its own doctrine. Look at how the tanks of the Germans, Americans, and British were developed in the cold war. The Americans would hold off the Russian T-whatevernumbertheywereupto's off on open plains. They would be in a long line, and would retreat while popping Russian tanks. Due to the lack of enemy flanking opportunities, the M1s were equipped with mainly frontal armour, and were made to be very maneuverable. These traits have continued to be present in the Abrams that we see today. Meanwhile, the British were on rugged cliffs and hills. The odd terrain meant that they were likely to get flanked, and even cut off from their allies. Therefore, the tanks were made to be slow, but massively armoured, the idea being that a surrounded Challenger could pop a whole bunch of Russian tanks before being popped itself. There wasn't much point in speed, as the tanks would have to go slow anyway on the terrain. These ideas, as with the American tanks, were passed on to their modern successors. Finally, the German tanks, being made in a relatively weak post-war economy (half of Germany was held by Russia after all) were designed to be fast, and used cheap metal instead of ceramics. The idea of these was to plug any gaps in the British or American lines as quickly as possible until reinforcements arrived.
Anyway, that's some military knowledge out of the system. 
if you took that all in and actually cared! 
The only part of that I disagree with is the German tanks. Yes, they wanted affordable tanks, but the current iteration of the Leopard 2 (the 2A6M) is probably at the point where it can be called a supertank, ranking with the Abrams and Challenger 2.
To me, a gun is better depending on what I need it for. For example, if I need to eliminate a few enemies at long distance, an MP5 is not going to cut it. On the other hand, an MP5 in room-clearing is quite useful; it's compact size and relatively powerful cartridge will make the close-quarters fighting pretty easy.
Overall, it all comes down to how you're going to employ your weapon systems, and what you want to pay for them. If you want the most bang for your buck, then it's quite a conundrum; on the other hand, if you want something cheap, a Russian tank will certainly be better, as an Abrams (1 Abrams!) costs about 1.5 MILLION AMERICAN DOLLARS (I use American dollars there because I don't know the equivalent in any other currencies). A Russian tank is also generally a much simpler piece of equipment, but unfortunately will lose to an Abrams for the most part.
I think that the above is also why I tend to favor the Eldar and Imperial Guard armies in Dawn of War. I like the (ironical this is) flexibility provided by both of them; the Eldar have their very finely specialized infantry that are actually quite versatile (how ironic) in Dawn of War (Banshees are anti-infantry melee units that are good for killing buildings in the early game; additionally the absolutely fucktons of DPS they put out is good for killing enemy commanders). The Imperial Guard has their robust vehicles and surprisingly tenacious infantry (granted you generally need Commissars around for executions /cue grimdark/). After all, Fire Prism spam=win (you need only 4 or 5 FPs to kill a Baneblade. And that's if you intend to do some basewrecking or kill the second one that will invariably be produced or have most of your investment intact. In all actuality you probably only need 2 Fire Prisms (FP has a bit more DPS than the BB, and nearly as much HP with only a slightly inferior armor type.), and Baneblades are MADE OF PURE WIN.
Come on man, what's not to like about a tank that has ELEVEN BARRELS OF DESTRUCTIVE FURY, RAINING DOWN HOLY VENGEANCE UPON THE ENEMIES OF MAN.
EDIT: and Howling Banshees have bewbs. BEWBS FOR THE BEWB GOD (that sounds so screwed up). It's a pity the Farseer is so flatchested in DoW2.
"I don't grin like a moron, I grin like a sociopath."
Hmm... Could the British follow the Eldar doctrine? There aren't many of us, but each regiment is specialised, and good at what it does. New game! Let's draw parallels between the real world and 40k!
On second thoughts, maybe not...
And, Whiskey, as promised, .
OOOOH, KARMA! SO SHINY!
Eldar are awesome because they have some cool stuff. Also, the Fire Prism tank got an overhaul (the GW model can now be quipped as either a Fire Prism tank or a Night Spinner artillery piece) as it has a new Prism Cannon system. Plus, HOWLING BANSHEE BEWBS. If only GW made a Farseer model with bewbs though. That's one thing that IS nice about the original Dawn of War in comparison to TT. Bewbed Farseers.
"I don't grin like a moron, I grin like a sociopath."
Ya, well the clans are all about to asplode, which is why I didn't join one, in a game this small clans don't end well...
Wow, big rant that I accidentally started.
Ah, well. Apache's pwn all.
Xer0 \^/
Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
Sins Forums
Demigod Forums
Stardock Forums