Sad.
>>65341317Certainly the era of tank aesthetics is over if they have to look like this. Stealth aircraft are also, frankly, less aesthetic, and I'm not totally sold on jets being more aesthetic than WW-II era prop bombers and fighters.Unfortunately, aesthetics really does come and go. Let's be real, it peaked in Western Europe around 1250-1450, and military kino as a whole peaked in Italy (and to a lesser extent France) in that time period.
>>65341317*The era of the third world tank is over because of drones
>>65341317Tank will adapt.Because tank is eternal.
>>65341325as technology improves stuff that was at first a problem becomes irrelevant, one day complexity is gonna be a non factor and the difference beetwen giant robot and tank is gonna be basicaly a skin.
>>65341500Mechs are gonna mostly replace tanks eventually. The only ones left using tanks are gonna be autists like mecha autists are now.
>>65341317Tanks will come back, they just will not have any people inside of them. Starlink makes having a person inside a tank a liability especially since autoloaders are old tec at this point.It will just be a mountain of steel around a computer the size of a desktop PC and that's okay.Thanks Bill gates :(
>>65341317Look at what they have to do to match even a fraction of our power
https://x.com/ArmoredWar/?cursor=DAAHCgABHNeYGsC__-sLAAIAAAATMjA2MTg0ODA0MTMxNzg5NjYzMAgAAwAAAAIAAA>>65341317>>65341325Everyone in the army has SHORAD now
>>65341317Honestly I never got the point of tanks, they're just big guns you can drive around that everyone wants to kill and everyone has the means to do so because they're xbawkshueg targets. Like ww1? Sure it'd be scary for an infantryman who just has a rifle but by then everyone was figuring ways to kill it. By ww2 everyone had antitank weapons and you're the biggest target on the battlefield and even an attack that doesnt destroy it entirely is probably severe damage to the mechanisms that could render it inoperable. They dont transport troops to the front or offer meaningful cover and only kind of sit around and maybe shell pillboxes if they dont get killed immediately? An infantry squad is going to be just as dead or more if you lit them up with a big machine gun as opposed to whatever hundred millimeter cannon they want to strap onto these things, and you could do so with a golf cart sized vehicle. Artillery makes a lot more sense because they can sit outside of the immediate danger and still put big shells downrange. Is the point just to waste enemy resources developing antitank weapons that are probably much less costly?
