I'd say that this senario is more difficult than Longer Road. There is an extreme Hail Mary shot that ended up being a kill despite not really seeing the target and while on the move.
To me GHPC is the best outside of government run simulators (AGTS and CCTT). I dislike the US Army's simulator because the difference between the simulator and the real thing is a chasm that can not ever close.
Not me, watching this as a form of study to better my own tactics. Although honestly it's just nice to see someone with genuine prior experience playing this.
As a layman, I'd always figured that a late model M60 with fantastic optics and a prepared position would do A-OK if fighting soviet armor. An M60 with none of that on on the move, though, seems like a worse bet. What do I know, though. I'm a cop. I think 20 yards is a hell of a long ways to practice shooting, lol.
@@BobjrsGaming Its hard to explain. I've played Long Road so much I know exactly where all of the targets will be. Therefore I know how to approach them. Even on the missions that I go in blind on I still try and do the same thing. Mostly when I'm using anything, but the M1/M1IP since those tanks are very hard to penetrate when compared to everything else. Though I still might flank with the M1 since it is the fastest tank in the game.
Love the tank it's crazy how some countries are still using them but extremely upgraded with a bigger gun and better armor kits and Optics. such a great tank for the era
Don't forget I am using the WORST Sabot round (M735). From the front you can only penetrate the front of the turret around the gun, driver's periscopes, and the lower front plate. IF you can hit them.
@@jerrysmooth24Guess what if you cross a t80 in the 80's you can be sure there is hind close to hum and su24, artillery exactly the same as on your side
@@spookythecat3055 The 80s would be against Abrams and besides some loyal east germans most warsaw pact countries are not going to stand well to a reagan era led nato army group especially given the instability at that time as much as I dislike reagan and thatcher the 80s is very lopsided against the USSR. The 60s makes more sense because the US was more of a nuclear pentomic army.
@zagstrukk well sure, I'm not arguing that it was a different tank for a different time. But the esthetics, in my opinion, especially the engine bay of the tank, is superior to the sanitary basic lines of Abraham's. The Abrams look like a child's drawing of a tank.
but it's so chubby, if it were a little flatter maybe it would look better, its proportions are just goofy no wonder the israelis tried to cover the ugliness with ERA
I have a strange question: If actually in contact with enemy armor, would you expect that people would slam extra rounds into knocked out enemy vehicles beyond what they train to do? I ask because I kind of expect that If I were in, say, a Bradley and came across a BMP, I'd dump about a million 25mm rounds into it before pausing. I imagine having a loading process for a main gun can change that some. I just look at data for gunfights with small arms and it seems like every fight starts with both teams dumping their entire magazine sorta towards their respective targets.
M60 vs t80b… interesting… if I’m not mistaken Israel had something similar happen but in the desert… can’t remember if it was t72b or t80b… if I was ever in this predicament I’d try to ambush and intentionally kill the engine and then knock out the barrel if not got for kill shot… noice gameplay love the content
@@zagstrukk ah… then I don’t remember where or who it was that had basically post ww2 tanks and went against t-72s and t80s and still barely came out on top
I also played Long Road but with the T64B vs M1's, I noticed some of the M1's would still shoot at me one round EVEN AFTER I hit their stores and I saw them flaming. Wouldn't the crew be alive but heavily concussed after 80 or so rounds would go off right near their heads with just a wall between them?
@@DiaconescuAlexandru2024 If the hatches are closed not really since all of the concussion would have to come through the armor. Yes they'd be in a slight daze, but still coherent enough engage targets.
The rounds in storage that are hit generally combust, rather than outright explode. Loud and scary, but not terribly concussive in terms of high explosive detonations. The game models wounds and deaths to crew members but it's difficult to portray significant emotional events or concussion. Also an abrams that loses its ammo storage may still have rounds in the ready rack.
I don't know how you see those targets so easily! Great job.
Cool vid! I’m always happy to see people playing GHPC. And you seem more qualified than most!
@@speck3824 Tank you. I did for real on a M1A2 SEP V2 for many years. So I understand the American fire control systems A LOT better
Those shots were amazing, you can tell you have had experience doing this ,great video💯
this is by FAR a great tank game. they are getting better and better.
To me GHPC is the best outside of government run simulators (AGTS and CCTT). I dislike the US Army's simulator because the difference between the simulator and the real thing is a chasm that can not ever close.
@@zagstrukk good points!
@@zagstrukkWhy the hell would they not invest in something more suited, I bet they get plenty of complaints
@@EthanolEnthusiast because the army is cheap. Besides AGTS and CCTT have basically everything they need. There just set up terribly in my opinion
Not me, watching this as a form of study to better my own tactics.
Although honestly it's just nice to see someone with genuine prior experience playing this.
As a layman, I'd always figured that a late model M60 with fantastic optics and a prepared position would do A-OK if fighting soviet armor. An M60 with none of that on on the move, though, seems like a worse bet. What do I know, though. I'm a cop. I think 20 yards is a hell of a long ways to practice shooting, lol.
After shooting tank gunnery 300 meters feels like I'm standing right next to the target.
This was cool. Only thing I was missing was a bit of your thought process, like "I am going to flank around this hill" or "Looks like... There he is!
Yeah I was kinda hoping he'd show off his experience like that too, some ongoing commentary on why he is doing this or that.
@@BobjrsGaming Its hard to explain. I've played Long Road so much I know exactly where all of the targets will be. Therefore I know how to approach them. Even on the missions that I go in blind on I still try and do the same thing. Mostly when I'm using anything, but the M1/M1IP since those tanks are very hard to penetrate when compared to everything else. Though I still might flank with the M1 since it is the fastest tank in the game.
Love the tank it's crazy how some countries are still using them but extremely upgraded with a bigger gun and better armor kits and Optics. such a great tank for the era
I would not want to be in a M60 vs T80s lmao
Don't forget I am using the WORST Sabot round (M735). From the front you can only penetrate the front of the turret around the gun, driver's periscopes, and the lower front plate. IF you can hit them.
irl it would be obviously be safer to be in a m60 because you have homies with artillery and if you're lucky a b-1 or a-10 or something
@@jerrysmooth24Guess what if you cross a t80 in the 80's you can be sure there is hind close to hum and su24, artillery exactly the same as on your side
@@spookythecat3055 The 80s would be against Abrams and besides some loyal east germans most warsaw pact countries are not going to stand well to a reagan era led nato army group especially given the instability at that time as much as I dislike reagan and thatcher the 80s is very lopsided against the USSR. The 60s makes more sense because the US was more of a nuclear pentomic army.
@@spookythecat3055 saddam lasted 6 weeks Gorbachev lasts a couple months
The m60 is the best-looking tank every made, and i will die on that hill.
@@tylerthegrimm It looks good, but doesn't even come close to how much of an upgrade the M1 is
@zagstrukk well sure, I'm not arguing that it was a different tank for a different time. But the esthetics, in my opinion, especially the engine bay of the tank, is superior to the sanitary basic lines of Abraham's. The Abrams look like a child's drawing of a tank.
but it's so chubby, if it were a little flatter maybe it would look better, its proportions are just goofy
no wonder the israelis tried to cover the ugliness with ERA
I have a strange question: If actually in contact with enemy armor, would you expect that people would slam extra rounds into knocked out enemy vehicles beyond what they train to do? I ask because I kind of expect that If I were in, say, a Bradley and came across a BMP, I'd dump about a million 25mm rounds into it before pausing.
I imagine having a loading process for a main gun can change that some. I just look at data for gunfights with small arms and it seems like every fight starts with both teams dumping their entire magazine sorta towards their respective targets.
@@GeriatricBullFrog yes, because if the enemy vehicle is burning it can't be recovered and repaired
M60 vs t80b… interesting… if I’m not mistaken Israel had something similar happen but in the desert… can’t remember if it was t72b or t80b… if I was ever in this predicament I’d try to ambush and intentionally kill the engine and then knock out the barrel if not got for kill shot… noice gameplay love the content
@@iamd3ad_ang3l10 It was T-54s, T-55s, and T62s
@@zagstrukk ah… then I don’t remember where or who it was that had basically post ww2 tanks and went against t-72s and t80s and still barely came out on top
I also played Long Road but with the T64B vs M1's, I noticed some of the M1's would still shoot at me one round EVEN AFTER I hit their stores and I saw them flaming. Wouldn't the crew be alive but heavily concussed after 80 or so rounds would go off right near their heads with just a wall between them?
@@DiaconescuAlexandru2024 If the hatches are closed not really since all of the concussion would have to come through the armor. Yes they'd be in a slight daze, but still coherent enough engage targets.
@@zagstrukk Thanks
The rounds in storage that are hit generally combust, rather than outright explode. Loud and scary, but not terribly concussive in terms of high explosive detonations. The game models wounds and deaths to crew members but it's difficult to portray significant emotional events or concussion. Also an abrams that loses its ammo storage may still have rounds in the ready rack.
i gave the game a shot and used the Bradley but after awhile i put the game down, i wanan see the M3a3 added at some point
The game is set in 1985. The M3A3 won't be added by the devs. Check out the mods on the discord.
The secondary sight is better my opinion because It's much more stabilized than the main sight. You gotta set the range 0 tho
You shouldn't have too since the Fire Control system will super elevate the gun and the reticle on the GAS will line up accordingly.
@@zagstrukk I am not zeroing the gun with FCS. I set the zeroing at minimum and shoot with estimation. It's super more advantaged at close ranges.
@@54oguzz Correct, but past 1KM you'll struggle to consitantly hit targets.
@@zagstrukkTrue