M1 weight problem...

Slash78 · Post by **Slash78** » Jan 19 2005

according to the SRUNITS.csv file you have the M1, M1A1 and M1A2 Abrams all at 62 tons (or tonnes like you spell it, what we in the us refer to as 'metric tons'). This in incorrect. The M1 weighs about 54 tons (54,000kg), M1A1 weights about 57 tons (57,000kg) and the M1A2, the most portly of the three tips the scale at 63 tons (63,000kg). M1A3 would probably weigh about the same where as the A4 and A5 would probably show some gain. The 6 ton different is the main reason why the US Marines will not have their M1A1s upgraded to the M1A2 standard (protection wise), however they continue to upgrade them in every other way (that doesn't add alot of weight).

Slash78 · Post by **Slash78** » Jan 19 2005

Also, the M1 has a higher top speed then the M1A1 or A2, it being 72km/h instead of 67km/h.

Post by **Balthagor** » Jan 19 2005

I got different data on the speeds;

M1
Speed
road 45 mph (72 kmh) governed
10 deg upslope 20 mph (32 kmh)
60 deg upslope 5 mph ( 7 kmh)
Acceleration 6.8 sec 0-20 mph (32 kmh)
Range 310 mi (498 km)
M1A1/M1A2
Speed
road 42 mph (66 kmh) governed
10 deg upslope 17 mph (27 kmh)
60 deg upslope 4 mph ( 7 kmh)

looking into the rest...

Slash78 · Post by **Slash78** » Jan 19 2005

I got different data on the speeds;

different??? that's what I said, M1 72km/h, M1A1/A2 67km/h.

Penta · Post by **Penta** » Jan 19 2005

Check what the speeds are ungoverned. IIRC, governors are only used in peacetime or training.

Slash78 · Post by **Slash78** » Jan 19 2005

Check what the speeds are ungoverned. IIRC, governors are only used in peacetime or training.

Governors are what keep the engine for frying the transmission. They are also used to keep gas consumsion down and the fuel consumsion is a problem with the M1 series even with the governors.

IIRC, the non-governed speed for the M1 series is about 70mph. However that can only be keep up for a few miles and after that, you would need to replace the entire powerplant.

The only time you can remove a governor without causing alot of damage or drastically increase brakedowns is on vehicles like 5-ton trucks and HMMWVs.

Post by **Balthagor** » Jan 19 2005

oh, my bad, I saw them as reveresed of what you'd said. Too much time staring at maps

dust off · Post by **dust off** » Jan 19 2005

I wasn't sure if I was being too picky about tracked vehicle movement across country needing to be better than wheeled cross country movement so deleted the post.

Anyway, just so wanted to say the military model is proving to be really well balanced, so I cant wait to try it turn based so we can make the most of the stats like combat time.

So after hours of trying to find fault with the units when I question something it does not deminish my great appreciation of how well its turning out. Every unit seems to have a place. Well done bg, keep it up.

Slash78 · Post by **Slash78** » Jan 20 2005

Anyone that says tracked units must always have better cross country performance hasn't seen an LAV-25 outrun an M1A1 across very rough desert. That's why I think there should be seperate rules for wheeled, multi-wheeled (6x6/8x8) and towed movement.

dust off · Post by **dust off** » Jan 20 2005

Tracked vehicles having less cross country penalty in the hex descriptions could provide a more general balanced approach. Exceptions could always be found. Can't really comment about LAV 25s in particular, but I should imagine LAVs etc would outrun M1s due to their further travel range which is represented within the game.

Post by **Balthagor** » Jan 20 2005

there is a terrain movement modifier based on the move type of either wheeled or tracked so I think we already do what you're looking for.