Was this any good?Did the drone cope cages reduce its effectiveness?Was it too expensive?
>>64429462i think they are pretty neat
>>64429462It's ridiculously ineffective compared to its competing fires.The moment battlefield observation became common, enabling accurate direction of fires all around, it was rendered nigh worthless.It's stuck in the middle between high-low weapon systems, being neither cheap and easy enough to spam all around like ordinary landmines, nor is it effective enough to be worth it for the cost.
AGFUHSGLUAG.pngI too mash keys for file names lol.
>>64429462They use EFPs instead of HEAT so they won't care about cope cages but the M93 mine was over $100k per unit.
>>64429535>They use EFPs instead of HEATThis is as bad /o/ with their OHC vs OHV. Overhead cam engines are also OHV because they also have over head valves. High Explosive Anti Tank rounds explosively form a penetrator (EFP) with their high explosives.
>>64429760OHC vs OHV is a perfect analogy because all OHCs are OHVs but not all OHVs are OHCs.I used EFP instead of HEAT to clarify which kind of warhead is used.
>>64429462It's a decent idea, but yes it basically was too expensive. You need one of these to cover the space 60+ TM62s would, but TM62s are free in abandoned warehouses by the milllions, and this is something Russia probably produced no more than a thousand of, with old electronics and assembled by hand mostly for propaganda.The American version might have neither of those issues, but it has to compete against guided artillery.
>>64429529>mash keysIt's German, you philistine.
>>64429760All EFPs are shaped charges, but not all shaped charges are EFPs. EFPs differentiate themselves by retaining their speed and shape better at longer ranges.HEAT rounds use a conical liner to form a literal explosively formed perpetrator, but the term "Explosively Formed Penetrator" denotes the longer ranger dish shaped shaped charges. It's dumb semantics
>>64429852The American one was dropped from inventory due to age. The design is almost 40 years old at this point.
>>64432260name of it?
>>64429462They're pretty funny in BF6. Put them down and let them find armor. Less damage, but enough to work with.
>>64432274The M93 Hornet.Developed in the '80s. They were talking about making them networked in the '90s so they could communicate targeting with each other and a central command post.New one is the XM204 and it is networked with the capability of machine learning.
>>64429548That' a 155mm SMArt submunition though, not a top-attack mine.
>>64432277They actually do decent damage with the only drawback being you only spawn with one of them. You're not gonna destroy an MBT because the driver drove into 3 regular mines like a retard but you can put them into more creative spots like rooftops for guaranteed damage.
>>64429462those mines are meant to be used sparingly as one component of a mixed minefieldif you use dumb blast resistant mines, magnetic mines, non removable AP mines and top attack mines you have defeated all effective methods of demining and you have a very effective, easy to defend obstacle
>>64432277Thank you for your service.
