On Tue 24 Jun, duckrvr_at_... wrote:
> At 12:06 PM 6/22/97 +1300, you wrote:
>
> >I have to disagree I don't think that Land raiders that susceptable to BMs.
> >In my example even in the second round of firing the Land raiders could
> >inflict 4.5 kills vs 1 kill for the remaining two Leman Russ
>
> But compared to Leman Russes (what a word), 1 BM strips an AT shot instead
> of 1 fp. That's 1/18 of the LR's firepower versus 1/30 for the Leman Russ's.
>
> There's also the fact that you have compared tanks armed to fight tanks with
> tanks armed to fight infantry. Obviously, in a duel the AT will win. I bet
> if you took infantry armed to fight tanks against infantry armed to kill
> infantry, the anit-infantry detachment would win, too.
>
> OTOH, I still think LRs are better . . .
>
> Temp
Looking at the arguments for and against I have to agree with you.
--
Sean Smith
Home - Seans_at_...
--
Received on Mon Jun 23 1997 - 19:38:44 UTC