 |
| |
|
|
cousarmy0001
|
|
i disagree. the Merkava is a much better looking tank :-)
i believe the Merkava Mk4 uses chobham armor. from what i've seen on the Chiorny Oriol, it's got the latest version of Russian reactive armor (incidentally, an idea they copied from the Isrealis), which many non-experts believe can defeat any projectile fired by the 120mm gun on the Abrams or Merkava.
it might be able to. once, anyway. that's the problem with reactive armor- once a brick is hit, the armor is weaker until said brick is replaced.
and any infantry hanging around outside is pretty screwed.
that being said, the Chiorny Oriol might be better than the Abrams or Merkava, though. the Russians tend to be about 30 years behind our stuff technology-wise, and both the Abrams and Merkava came out in the very early '80s, so they're both a good 20 years older than this.
sorry for the essay. maybe i should throw a unit in here to justify this whole thing....
|
|
| |
|
|
|
typhoon
|
 |
of Bollocks
Jan 2003
time: 05:34
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by our_man
I'm not sure if any of these are a Merkava are not, but it's a good collection of Israeli armour.
Out of curiosity, what's it for?  |
The compilation is of various fairline and tanelorn units, most recoloured by catfish, some by me. The excellent Merkava now being flaunted on this thread is by Catfish, and the shitty Magach is mine. It was put together for an update of Under Siege, which never materialised.
I'd appreciate it if you actually credit tanelorn, fairline, and catfish, since the lion's share was their efforts, instead of trying to pass it off as someone else's.
(Practicing what I preach: Case, fairline, tanelorn, and jimmywax. Their work, not mine.)
That being said...
 Attachment: typhoon chironyoriol.gif
This has been downloaded 228 time(s).
Last edited by typhoon on 21-08-2005 at 19:11
|
|
| |
|
|
|
our_man
|
 |
Glasgow, Scotland
Oct 2000
time: 05:34
|
|
quote:
I'd appreciate it if you actually credit tanelorn, fairline, and catfish, since the lion's share was their efforts, instead of trying to pass it off as someone else's. |
Was that comment directed at me? If so, could you explain why? I did not try to pass it off as 'someone else's, and I resent this insinuation.
The units remain exactly the same as they were when I downloaded them months ago; I did not alter the signatures in any way. The signatures of Fairline, Catfish and Tanelorn can clearly be seen, as can those of Jimmywax and Nemo, among others.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
typhoon
|
|
of Bollocks
Jan 2003
time: 05:34
|
|
quote:
Check my message again. Did I say 'my collection'. No. I said 'a collection'. If you noticed when people have posted compilations before in this and other threads, the names of the authors have not been mentioned either. |
This doesn't neccessarily make them right. As mentioned before, this is a touchy issue and some have gotten their arses bitten off on account of it- never by me though (which is what you seem to have incorrectly assumed.) I'm not going to mention names but it has happened before.
quote:
You neglected to mention Nemo yourself - why? His signature is on quite a few of them, and as he was around before most of the other authors it's safe to assume that the basic design of that image was his, with others modifying it. |
Must have missed that. His work so great and pervasive that sometimes I confess that I take him for granted, and mention only the most recent pair of hands that they have gone through. Put him down as well.
quote:
They're at least 7 different authors; I think (and I believe most people would agree with me) that it would be a bit excessive to list them. How do you decide who gets listed and who doesn't? |
That debate has happened before, with inconclusive results. It is conceded that to do so may not be worth all that effort, as some have argued. Personally I make every effort to credit every source of the work on which I build on. I take my cue from compilations by Curt and Steph- they go through great pains to ensure that credit's where it's due. If they aren't good enough role models, who is?
As I see it, however, this point is moot since nowhere in your post is anyone credited at all. I'm sorry, but changing the topic isn't helping you too much.
quote:
Let's be honest, I wouldn't really care about this except for the fact that you accused me of trying to pass these off as my own. |
And see, I wouldn't have bothered with this lamblasting if you had mentioned where they had come from.
quote:
I've been around a lot longer than you kid, and I'd like to think by now the members of the SLeague would know the only work I take credit for is my own. |
Not trying to bring your reputation into question at all, just pointing out a few things that will make Poly a friendlier place.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
our_man
|
|
Glasgow, Scotland
Oct 2000
time: 05:34
|
|
quote:
PS: this debate is wasting valuble thread space. I'd suggest you send your reply through PM. |
For someone who wants to make Poly a friendlier place, I've never had such a personal attack on my character by any other member. Learn a bit of diplomacy kid. I don't think we've anything left to say to each other. PM if you want, but don't hold your breath waiting for a reply.
For my own future reference though, I'd like ask the authors of the units who are still around - who should go down as the authors in a post? Despite typhoon claiming my point was moot  , I think it's quite relevant. As some of you will know, the previous times I have posted units of someone else, they have belonged to one author (fairline), and I did credit him. If there is a compilation of units with several authors, I'm not going to list each and every author. And guess what? Looking back over other compilations, no-one else does either. God knows why I have been singled out by typhoon, as he's never made an issue of it before with anyone else  . The funny thing is that this is one of the few times I've ever posted other people's units to help someone out. 
I understand don't want to answer this question and become embroiled in an argument, but if you feel you can add something constructive to help clarify to me what is the accepted etiquette, please do. I will respect your opinion.
The best thing would be if everyone with their initials on the image file could tell me whether I should have mentioned them by name when I put the units down. To stop cluttering the thread, could you PM me your answer?
Would it be possible for the mods to delete the previous posts of the 'discussion' but leave this one for 2-3 days, until the artists have had enough time to see it and respond to my query? Thanks.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
cousarmy0001
|
|
the chances of the Isrealis ending up facing Russian built armor is a much greater possibility, though.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
cousarmy0001
|
|
as was proven with the 120mm smoothbore currently in use with the Abrams, Challenger, Leopard 2, Merkava Mk4, and a whole bunch more, and was also proven with the 105mm gun that was on the M60A3, Merkava Mk1-3, Leopard 1, original production Abrams, Chieftan, etc etc, it's not necessarily the caliber that matters.
the 120mm gun far outclassed the 125mm and larger guns used on Soviet bloc MBTs, despite the competition being of a larger caliber.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
cousarmy0001
|
|
my bad. i don't know British tanks that well, i assumed that the Challenger came out around the time they were switching to the 120, and since the Chieftain was the tank it replaced, i assumed it had the 105.
i thought the German 120 was the NATO standard gun?
i guess it really doesn't matter. there's always some major power in NATO that's gotta do their own thing. and i'm not referring to any specific country when i say that, as pretty much all of them have at least one weapon system that's not compatable with the others.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Sarsstock
|
|
That lovely Panther wouldn't happen to be part of America's response to the Luftwaffe in "Atomic Eagle: The Price of Freedom" would it?
In any case it looks fantastic!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
cousarmy0001
|
|
not to be too picky, but i believe "Zorro" was the nickname given to the T-28Ds that they used in 'Nam before trading them in for the Skyraider (which was, of course, much better suited for the task)
those two aircraft are excellent, by the way. they make one of the ugliest aircraft i've ever seen look good (and i'm a guy who thinks the A-10 and F-4 are attractive aircraft)
well done!
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:34.
Apolyton Time is 00:34. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
21-08-2005 02:40
Attachment: 
|
