Would it having ~5 inches of composite armor (semi-ablative min-max armor composite layered with ablative alloy armor, Osium-Iridium alloy (ala Hammer's Slammers Ursa tanks), Pollyalloy armor, titanium alloy, Ferro-ceramics, walled carbon nanotubes, Mollybdinum Pollysteel Alloy with diamond-carbon nanotube weave, Titanium, Titanium weave (ala Craven Corporation armor)) with possible armor enhancement packages (utilizing things like hydro-crystalline energy absorbing armor gel (which is extremely resistant to kinetics), more ceramics, and more), a Mono-Permeable Anti-Kinetic/Energy Dispersion Defense Barrier to act like an omnipresent shield (only way to 'down' such a shield is to destroy its emitters), a 150mm coilgun (called a linear cannon) firing rounds at 10km/s, a UV-B FEL laser, 2 M2B4 HMGs (think Ma Dauce 2.0), an active defense mount using a .50 cal plasma beam pulse gun, powered by a proton-proton fusion turbine, can move up to 95kmh on road or between 70-85 off road, a sophisticated suite of electronic counter wave measures and cross-spectrum sensors, countermeasure mortars that fire flare/chaff hybrid countermeasure mortar rounds, a fire control suite that can shot targets to horizon within a 10 nanosecond reaction time, massing 175 tons, and slightly larger than a M1A2 with TUSK.
Aesthetics would be mostly between the Abrams, Leopard II, and Challenger II. It's a tread vehicle with the capability to run on the road wheels bare. Its name is Schwarzkopf.
Overkill and over engineered? Maybe. Then again this thing is designed to go up against tanks with particle, plasma, and lasers a plenty as well as coil guns with similar power.
What's the power source? Also, it sounds like those weapon systems would generate significant amounts of waste heat. Do you think the systems would manage heat removal separately, or would the the tank handle it with some sort of cooling plant to remove it?
That curb weight is quite high, and at the stated size there are practical limits to track width. I assume these would be brought in by rail or some sort of superheavy transport.
That's the number I was gravitating towards. I figured with both the size of the vehicle, the emphasis on survivability, and the extreme power of the weapon systems involved that the crew would have sealed and pressurized compartments in the turret and hull that were shock loaded. This would give a bit more protection against overpressure and impact.
Easy to abandon but something like that. The M2B4s are essentially M2s capable of firing hyper velocity (3km/s+) ammunition. The FEL is not nuke level, and at that speed the kinetic rounds are 'their mass in TNT' not 'nukes' and the crew and troops in general are in essentially power armor for the faction of origin of this tank.
The tank itself is part of the pinnacle of [i]manned[/i] tank warfare in-fic. Quite easy to use too if you got the uplink protocols (all of the crew have Mind-Machine interfaces similar to the jacks in Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex to hook up directly to the tank for maximum effectiveness).
Power source is a fusion reactor using proton-proton fusion. Most of the weight is actually cooling systems, transmission system, alloyed tracks and road wheels, and armor. Usual forms of transport is anti-grav capable mobile bases.
Materials science took a great leap in-verse as well and they can be brought in by rail.
The heavy armor is because there is no longer a 'lag time' between firing the weapon and hitting the target so speed is more or less an afterthought and that everyone now understands that the CREW is worth more than ten tanks, at least on some level. Direct fire weapons are now TO HORIZON if LOS is unhindered and anything within 10km is going to get a kinetic explosive surprise... let alone a laser, plasma beam, or particle projection weapon.
In size its ~1.25 to 1.75 times larger than an Abrams with TUSK. The mass would be actually much larger if the barrier wasn't in there...
Well, the game is still in beta, so we may see some adjustment of unit performance still. I'm glad you like the way it looks, though. I tend to prefer the designs that tie into real-world roles a bit better.
I was thinking the same thing about its vague resemblance to the mammoth tank, but after playing countless hours of world of tanks I can only theorize its a tank destroyer but more of a base defender because of its low profile and heavy frontal armor. Having 2 main guns for higher rate of fire and the flak turret for anti air and infantry. Very nice design, while cutting edge its a possible look a like for a future real tank. love it
This looks awesome. ^w^ Nice job! I only have one question, why does the quad-turret look like it's only capable of aiming in one direction? It looks hard mounted onto the main turret with no means of turning to face other opponents. Just thought I'd point that out.
Well, originally the quad MG was going to be able to separately controlled, but this wasn't done for technical reasons, ultimately. A style revision was also done on the unit to emphasize the size of the main battery, and this led to the gun enclosure projecting above the roof of the turret. Naturally, this limited the real-world firing arc to the right side of the vehicle, but was deemed a good look for what we were doing. RTS unit design, like miniatures, involves a certain amount of caricature it seems like.
It is still very doable by real world standards, all you need is something to allow for free turning, not machine-aided turning. If the turret can be turned by a human being then turret rotation can still be done. I'm just not sure game mechanics could handle it though.