Spyke
sopuli.xyz

A guy in a safer bush with a $1k drone has a 70% chance of hitting the guy with the RPG.

73
froggersreply
lemmy.world

A guy in a Ghillie suit with a 100$ knife has a 70% chance of stabbing the guy with the drone.

47
krashmoreply
lemmy.world

Something something... 70%... bacon cheeseburger... heart disease.

17

they were too well camouflaged so the tank crew couldn't see them and backed over them reversing out of the drive

16
Rakonatreply
lemmy.world

Dude with a 2000 dollar thermal sight is gonna clap the guy with a javelin. Also any tank made by a competent nation (i.e.: not russia) will have thermal sights on their tank specifically to find some fuckboi on the bushes with a vibecheck tube.

5

Not to mention the myriad of other anti AT weapon tech like all the warning systems, IR smoke, and trophy systems. Now the Abrams X is real heckin fright

2

If you have a handful of tanks, your enemy has to spend a lot of effort on getting rocket launchers. Not just buying them, but also the logistics strain to get them to the frontline.

And if you notice the enemy forgot to bring their launchers, you can deploy your tanks, and exploit their mistake.

Mass tank assaults are over. But using them as an integrated part of a force still makes sense to me.

39
kbin.social

Just run over the fucker if he's only 200m away.

Tanks are obsolete. Embrace killdozer.

24
lemmy.ml

10 dudes in a bush vs 10 dudes in a bush.

21
feddit.de

Time to start a bush selling business. They gonna be in high demand.

11

Russia will pivot on it at some point. Closer they come to running out, the more they'll look for an excuse around not fielding them.

11
Droechaireply
lemm.ee

I've heard that submarines win vs tanks in all engagements at 120 meter below sea

6

Submarines would also outperform tanks in space.

Randall Moore (xkcd author) wants to remind everyone turning the missiles around for maneuvering to remove the warheads. Can't link the xkcd because it's in a physical book.

1

You reached the end