.Armoured warfare or armored warfare (; ), mechanised warfare or tank warfare is the use of in. It is a major component of modern. The premise of armoured warfare rests on the ability of troops to penetrate conventional lines through use of by armoured units.Much of the application of armoured warfare depends on the use of and related vehicles used by other supporting arms such as, and other, as well as mounted combat engineers and other support units. The of armoured warfare was developed to break the static nature of on the, and return to the 19th century school of thought that advocated manoeuvre and 'decisive ' outcomes in. Contents.World War I Modern armoured warfare began during the of 1914–1918. Strategists wanted to break the, and forced on commanders on the by the effectiveness of entrenched defensive infantry armed with —known as. Under these conditions, attacks usually advanced very slowly and incurred massive casualties.

The following is a list of the weapons that appear in Final Fantasy Tactics Advance, divided by class and ordered by attack power. Swords are light one-handed weapons that are equippable by the Soldier, Warrior, and Dragoon job classes. .FMI 4-93.41(FM 63-11) ARMY FIELD SUPPORT BRIGADE TACTICS, TECHNIQUES, AND PROCEDURES February 2007 HEADQUARTERS, DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY DISTRIBUTION RESTRICTON: Approved for public release.

The developers of tanks aimed to return manoeuvre to warfare, and found a practical way to do so: providing caterpillar traction to (machine-)guns (allowing them to overcome trenches) while at the same time offering them armour protection against (rifle, machine gun) fire as they were moving. British heavy tank of World War IBritain and France first developed tanks in 1915 as a way of navigating the and other obstacles of while remaining protected from machine-gun fire. British first went into action on 15 September 1916, but did not manage to break the deadlock of trench warfare.

The first French employment of tanks, on 16 April 1917, using the, also failed to live up to expectations. In the (November to December 1917) British tanks were more successful, and broke a German, the.Despite the generally unpromising beginnings, the military and political leadership in both Britain and France during 1917 backed large investment into armoured-vehicle production. This led to a sharp increase in the number of available tanks for 1918. The, on the contrary, produced only a few tanks, late in the war. Twenty German tanks were produced during the entire conflict, compared to over 4,400 French and over 2,500 British tanks of various kinds. Nonetheless, World War I saw the first tank-versus-tank battle, during the in April 1918, when a group of three German A7V tanks engaged a group of three British which they met accidentally.After the final German of 21 March to 18 July 1918, the Entente deployed tanks en masse at the (18 to 22 July 1918) and (August 1918), which ended the stalemate imposed by trench warfare on the Western Front, and thus effectively ended the war.Tactically, deployment plans for armour during the war typically placed a strong emphasis on direct support for infantry. The tank's main tasks were seen as crushing barbed-wire and destroying machine-gun nests, facilitating the advance of foot soldiers.

Theoretical debate largely focused on the question of whether to use a 'swarm' of light tanks for this, or a limited number of potent heavy vehicles. Though in the Battle of Cambrai a large concentration of British heavy tanks effected a breakthrough, it was not exploited by armour.

The manoeuvrability of the tank should at least in theory regain armies the ability to enemy lines. In practice, tank warfare during most of World War I was hampered by the technical immaturity of the new weapon system, limiting speed, operational range, and reliability, and a lack of effective armored tactics.Strategic use of tanks developed only slowly during and immediately after World War I, partly due to these technical limitations but also due to the prestige role traditionally accorded to horse-mounted cavalry. An exception, on paper, was the of the British Army's Colonel, who envisaged using the expected vast increase in armour production during 1919 to execute deep strategic penetrations by mechanised forces consisting of tanks and infantry carried by lorries, supported by aeroplanes, to paralyse the enemy command-structure.Following the First World War, the technical and doctrinal aspects of armoured warfare became more sophisticated and diverged into multiple schools of doctrinal thought.Interwar period 1920s. FullerDuring the 1920s, a very limited number of tanks were produced. There were however, important theoretical and technical developments. Various British and French commanders who had contributed to the origin of the tank, such as, and, theorised about a possible future use of independent armoured forces, containing a large concentration of tanks, to execute deep strategic penetrations.

Especially Liddell Hart wrote many books about the subject, partly propagating Fuller's theories. Such doctrines were faced with the reality that during the 1920s the armoured vehicles, as early in general, were extremely unreliable, and could not be used in sustained operations. Mainstream thought on the subject was more conservative and tried to integrate armoured vehicles into the existing infantry and cavalry organisation and tactics.Technical development initially focussed on the improvement of the suspension system, transmission and engine, to create vehicles that were faster, more reliable and had a better range than their WW I predecessors. To save weight, such designs had thin armour plating and this inspired fitting small-calibre high-velocity guns in turrets, giving tanks a good antitank capacity. Both France and Britain eventually built specialised infantry tanks, more heavily armoured to provide infantry support, and cavalry tanks that were faster and could exploit a breakthrough, seeking to bring about defeat of the enemy by severing his lines of communication and supply, as cavalry had done during the previous century.The British were the first to create a larger fully mechanised unit when the sanctioned the creation of the, which was formed on 1 May 1927, under infantry Colonel R. Collins, after Fuller (was) refused the function.

Its sub-units were entirely mobile and consisted of reconnaissance and, a battalion of forty-eight tanks, a motorised machine-gun battalion, a mechanised artillery regiment, which had one battery of fully tracked self-propelled capable of acting as conventional or anti-aircraft artillery, and a motorised company of field engineers. The unit carried out operations on and was observed by the other major nations, the, and the. Although its performance was recognised, it was disbanded in 1928.All major European states (with the exception of Germany that was forbidden to possess armoured vehicles under the ), the US, and Japan, would create their own experimental mechanised forces during the late 1920s, many using either French or British vehicle designs or even directly purchased vehicles, but largely borrowing from both to develop their own doctrines.1930s. Main article: Pre-war Much of the Red Army development in tank use was based on the theoretical work carried out by such officers as and in the mid to late 1930s.

A T-34-85 tank on display at in April 2007.At the start of the Second World War much of the Red Army, including its armoured forces, was in transition and recovering from the. The Red Army ignored the lessons from, which had been successfully conducted by General, and relied instead on lessons from politically selected officers who were veterans of the. The result was a poor showing during the. The Red Army tank fleet was extremely large, consisting of some 24,000 vehicles, but many were obsolete or unfit for service due to difficulties with supplying spare parts and lack of qualified support staff.One important development took place shortly before the war, which influenced Soviet armoured doctrine and tank design for a decade: the creation of the.

Developed on the chassis and using for the first time, the T-34 proved a shock to the German forces in the first. T-34 had excellent combination of mobility, protection and firepower.

Using wide tracks, the T-34 was also able to negotiate terrain in difficult weather conditions, something that persistently dogged the German designs. Assessing the success of the German strategy, operational methods and tactics, the Red Army concluded that it should return to the use of operational methods developed before the war, so the were eventually created. To complement the T-34, heavy tanks, self-propelled artillery, and tank destroyers were also designed. Much of the use of Red Army's armoured forces were used in concentrations during all, initiated under strict secrecy and using the.

Germany In Germany, in-depth research through theoretical approaches, wargaming and exercises developed a confidence within the Panzertruppe itself (and political support by Hitler) in the armoured formation as the key battlefield formation — although this view was before 1940 not shared by the other Arms of Service. A key part of this doctrine was improved communications by having radios in all tanks, although this ideal suffered from technical limitations as most tanks had receiver sets only. Guderian (right edge) guides armoured force in PolandAt the outbreak of World War II, the German armoured forces benefited from a much more profound and more flexible training than that of the Allies on the tactical and operational level. German tanks operated while directed by radio communication, which allowed tank commanders to take full advantage of the manoeuvrability of their vehicles.Even after the, 'Blitzkrieg' was not defined on the strategic level.

Guderian and von Manstein devised a strategy that entailed what later would be seen as the essence of blitzkrieg: concentrated panzer divisions performing swift deep penetrations. This strategy was not initially accepted by German High Command.

Nevertheless, the final in 1940 hinged on the element of a Schwerpunkt at Sedan, and was assigned to such forces. The great success of this operation led to blitzkrieg being integrated with strategic planning for the rest of the war.German tanks could carry with them enough fuel and supplies to go almost two hundred kilometers, and enough food to last three to nine days. This relative independence from supply lines proved effective, and allowed them to advance on critical targets much faster and without hesitation. Another factor was the ability of commanders to make strategic decisions in the field and without much consultation with their headquarters, the orders of which were often simply ignored. A prime example is 's lead-from-the-front approach while commanding 7.Panzer-Division which allowed him a flexible response to the battlefield situation, an instance of the (reliance on subordinates to make their own decisions).The effect of German Panzer's speed, mobility, and communication shocked the French, and ultimately were the deciding factors in the battle. It overcame their inferiority in armour and armament relative to the main French materiel such as the. The superior tactical and operational praxis, combined with an appropriate strategic implementation, enabled the Germans to defeat forces superior in armour (both quantitatively and qualitatively) in the battles of 1940, but just as Blitzkrieg became a deliberate military doctrine, in 1941it ultimately failed on the eastern front, though initially attaining spectacular successes.Before the war, had in his Achtung–Panzer!

Propounded a thorough mechanisation of the German forces. By 1942, increased AFV-production allowed a fuller implementation of this ideal. Now extensive armoured combined arms team could be formed, distinct from a purely or formation. The panzer divisions integrated tanks with (riding in to be protected from small-arms fire while being transported) and (howitzers fitted on a tank chassis). This allowed the panzer division to become an independent combat force, in principle able to overcome the problems of attaining a against entrenched enemy infantry, equipped with large numbers of antitank-guns, with the potential to completely halt tank assaults inflicting devastating losses to armoured units without infantry support. However, much of the AFV production was increasingly diverted away from the Panzertruppe.

The Artillery formed its own units and infantry divisions were given their own companies. Despite lowering their formal organic strength, from the summer of 1943 onwards, the armoured divisions were structurally short of tanks.United States. US Tank Battalion Structure - November 1944.

Each Battalion had 53 M4 Sherman Medium Tanks and 17 M5 Stuart Light Tanks. Heavy Armored Divisions had 6 Battalions (318 M4 Tanks, 102 M5 Tanks) while Light Armoured Divisions had 3 (159 M4 Tanks, 51 M5 Tanks). Many US Infantry Divisions had a permanent Tank Battalion attached during the length of the War in Europe.Though the U.S.

M10 tank destroyer in action near, June 1944. Tank destroyers The US team included air support, artillery, engineers, and a tank component supplemented by formed into independent. The latter is most closely identified with the Chief of Army Ground Forces,.

Having studied the early German successes McNair came under the belief that US forces would be faced with fast moving enemy forces who would seek to bypass, isolate and reduce US forces in a replay of the Fall of France. To stem the flood of marauding panzers, fast moving powerfully armed tank destroyer battalions were created to be held back and used in the counter-attack.It was also calculated that US interests would be better served by large numbers of reliable ( battle-worthiness) medium tanks rather than a smaller number of unreliable heavy tanks. It was decided therefore to slow the production of the US heavy tank designs such as the and concentrate resources on mass-producing the and tank destroyers such as the. To be able get into position to counter-attack, the tank destroyers had to be fast. To achieve the desired mobility and agility from the engines available the armour protection was sacrificed, a measure of protection coming from being nimble and hopefully from being able to knock out the enemy before they could get a shot in. Although they usually had guns of either 75 mm or 76 mm calibre (the used a 90mm calibre gun), the tank destroyer units were issued with the ancestor of the modern, rounds which made their guns much more powerful than a simple comparison of calibres would suggest.Japanese The Japanese doctrine was mainly French in concept but with some purely Japanese elements.

Due to Japan's naval priorities in construction and inter-service feuds (the marine branch of the favoured all-around protective armour) tanks were lightly armoured. As with most armour during the 1930s, the main guns were small in calibre: 37 mm for their light tanks and 47 mm for the medium tank, but this was sometimes compensated by a high muzzle velocity. The IJA's use of tanks in China exemplifies its doctrine: were used for scouting or acted as mobile infantry support, while supported the infantry and assaulted deeper objectives, but did not fight en masse.In 1939, the Japanese Army engaged armour at. During the three-month-long war, Japanese armour had shown their weakness against Soviet tanks; and the resulting Japanese defeat prompted a series of complaints by the Imperial Army to incorporate improvements in future Japanese armour. This is the primary reason IJA tanks were not as successful while being used with IJA tactics. The tank forces of the US Army consisted of the and light tanks up until 1941, although these vehicles were five years newer than the 1935 built 's, the IJA and US light tanks were comparable to each other, and seemingly performed well for their respective forces during jungle combat operations; during their phase of World War II.As with all armour, maintenance was a continuous challenge; especially in tropical environments.

When IJA and SNLF (Imperial marines) tanks did clash with the enemy they were quickly destroyed by concealed anti-tank guns or overwhelming numbers of hostile tanks. Japan was a naval power, and concentrated its production on warships, thus placing a low priority on armoured vehicle development, its tanks becoming quickly obsolete during the later years of the war. A number of designs that were equal to heavier foreign types were on the drawing board at the beginning of the war, but would only be built in small numbers towards the end, being placed in reserve, to be deployed for the defence of Japan itself.Chinese. This section needs expansion. You can help. ( September 2019)Arab-Israeli wars The conflict between Arab nations in the East Mediterranean region and Israel in particular would serve to become a testing ground for development in armoured warfare during the decades of the Cold War.

Both sides in the Arab-Israeli series of conflicts made heavy use of tanks and other armoured vehicles due to the practicality of tanks in the desert environment these conflicts largely took place in.During the and, Israeli armoured units typically had the advantage, mainly due to good tactics and.Conversely, the (1973) illustrated the problems that can arise if armoured and infantry units do not work closely together. Destruction derby raw. Tanks, operating independently in large numbers, were decimated by Egyptian anti-tank teams, well-distributed amongst regular infantry, and often equipped with new, first-generation portable.

This is an extreme example but exemplifies what has been fairly thoroughly documented since the Second World War: tanks and infantry work best by taking advantage of each other's strengths and combining to minimise the weaknesses.In many conflicts, it was usual to see infantry riding on the back of tanks, ready to jump off and provide support when necessary. Unfortunately, the design of many modern tanks makes this a dangerous practice. The -powered, for example, has such hot exhaust gas that nearby infantry have to be careful where they stand. Tanks can also be very vulnerable to well aimed; well-coordinated air support and artillery units can help overcome this.The emergence of guided missiles While attempts to defeat the tank were made before and during the Second World War, through the use of conventional high velocity artillery, this proved increasingly difficult in the post-war period due to increased armour protection and mobility of tanks.In response, the Soviet Union, the country with the largest armoured fleet in the world, strove to incorporate some anti-tank capability into almost every infantry weapon.

By the 1960s, Soviet defense scientists were designing portable. These new weapons were to be either carried by infantry, or fired from the newly developed infantry fighting vehicle. They were in use with Soviet forces before the end of the decade.In 1973, the Army failed to anticipate the importance of these new weapon systems. Hundreds of man-portable anti-tank guided missiles (ATGMs), supplied to by the and could be operated by infantry without having extensive training, inflicted heavy losses on the Israeli armoured formations. Since then, ATGMs have played an important role within the Israeli Army, having developed advanced domestic-made versions ( see missile), which have been widely exported throughout the world.In the recent, while Israeli infantry were able to easily defeat opposing ATGM teams, tanks operating on their own suffered several hits from the latest advanced Russian tandem-warhead types (such as the ). This highlighted that tanks operating solely, in the era of ATGMs, are extremely vulnerable.Responding to the serious tank losses suffered against Hezbollah, in cooperation with developed a missile defence system for tanks, called, to intercept and destroy anti tank missiles. The system was successfully deployed in combat on March 1, 2011, when it intercepted an anti tank missile during an engagement on the border.

NATO During the, assumed armoured warfare to be a dominant aspect of conventional ground warfare in Europe. Although the use of light tanks was largely discontinued, and heavy tanks were also mostly abandoned, the medium tank design evolved into heavier models due to increase in armour and larger sized main weapon resulting in the (MBT) which came into existence, combining most of the different types of tanks during.For the most part the NATO armoured doctrine remained defensive, and dominated by use of nuclear weapons as deterrence. Although most NATO nations began the Cold War period with a large number of US-designed tanks in their fleets, there was a considerable degree of disagreement on the design of future MBTs among the NATO major nations. Both the US and Germany experimented with, but abandoned the missile-armed.

The basic design of the United States would evolve until the main battle tank was replaced with the gas-turbine powered in the 1980s. The British Army also retained a World War II tank design, the, which proved to be highly successful and was not fully replaced until the 1970s.The decided to develop their own tank in the 1960s, and in the 1970s produced the, which was a somewhat lighter design, conforming to German doctrine that emphasised speed over protection. From the same initial collaborative project as the Leopard I, the French series of tanks also emphasised manoeuvre over protection. By the 21st century, most advanced western main battle tanks were built around powerful engines, large 120 mm guns and.Warsaw Pact. Czechoslovak armoured personnel carrier produced by in.The armoured doctrine was substantially influenced by the developments in the Soviet Army which sought to adopt its existing doctrine evolved during World War II to the nuclear battlefield. In the early 1960s this led to a number of important developments in the armoured forces and their supporting Arms. One important development was the transition of the Second World War use of Cavalry-Mechanised Group (CMG) into the Cold War Operational Manoeuvre Group (OMG) that was designed to exploit breakthroughs to penetrate NATO's defences in depth.

This was a culmination of the Deep Battle theory dating to the 1930s.In 1964 a significant breakthrough in tank design was achieved in the Soviet Union when the was produced which for the first time used an automatic loader, reducing the crew of the tank to three crewmen. Subsequently, this model, and the later and tanks introduced further innovations that influenced armoured warfare by introducing guided missiles into the tank ammunition mix, allowing fire from standard tank guns.

The Soviet Union was also one of the countries that used two Main Battle Tanks: The high-quality T-80s and lower quality T-72s. Modern Soviet tanks, like the ones mentioned, are typically armed with 125 mm (5 in) smooth bore guns. Advancements in Soviet tanks include improved Fire Control Systems, strong armour protected by, and defensive countermeasures (such as Shtora-1 and Arena). The German is one of the best protected infantry fighting vehicles and is supposed to deliver troops to the frontTanks rarely work alone; the usual minimum unit size is a platoon (platoon is the smallest US Army/Marine unit led by an officer, and a component of a company or troop) of three to five tanks. The tanks of the platoon work together providing mutual support: two might advance while covered by the others then stop and provide cover for the remainder to move ahead.Normally, multiple platoons coordinate with and use their mobility and firepower to penetrate weak points in enemy lines. This is where the powerful engines, tracks and turrets come into play.

The ability to rotate the turret by a full 360° allows coordinated movement within and between platoons, while defending against attacks from multiple directions and engaging troops and vehicles without stopping or slowing down.When on the defensive, they wait in prepared positions or use any natural elements (such as small hills) for cover. A tank sitting just behind a hill crest (') exposes only the top of its turret, with the gun and sensors, to the enemy, leaving the smallest possible target while allowing it to engage the enemy on the other side of the hill.

Tanks are usually able to depress the main gun below the horizontal since modern kinetic energy (KE) rounds have nearly flat trajectories. Without this they would be unable to exploit such positions. However, upon cresting a hill, the tank may expose its thinly armoured underside to enemy weapons.The deposition of armour around a tank is not uniform; the front is typically better armoured than the sides or rear. Accordingly, normal practice is to keep the front towards the enemy at all times; the tank retreats by reversing instead of turning around.

Driving backwards away from an enemy is even safer than driving forwards towards them since driving forwards over a bump can throw the front of the tank up in the air, exposing the thin armour of the underside and taking the gun off the target due to its limited angle of depression.The tracks, wheels and suspension of a tank are outside the armoured hull and are some of the most vulnerable spots. The easiest way to disable a tank (other than a direct hit in a vulnerable area with a full-power anti-tank weapon) is to target the tracks for a ' ( m-kill), or target all external visual aids with rubbery cohesive substances such as melted rubber or blackened high viscosity epoxy resins. Once a tank is disabled it is easier to destroy. This is why side-skirts are an important feature; they can deflect heavy machine-gun bullets and trigger the detonation of rounds before they strike the running gear. Other vulnerable parts of a typical tank include the engine deck (with air intakes, radiators, etc.) and the turret ring, where the turret joins the hull.When used defensively, tanks are often sunk into trenches or placed behind earth for increased protection. The tanks can fire off a few shots from their defensive position, then retreat (reversing) to another prepared position further back and drive behind the berms or into the trenches there.

These positions can be constructed by the tank crews, but preparations are better and quicker if carried out by combat engineers with bulldozers. Overhead protection, even if it is fairly thin, can also be very useful since it can help pre-detonate artillery shells and avoid direct hits from above which can be deadly to tanks, by striking them at their thinnest armour.

In short, tank crews find as many ways as possible to augment the armour on their vehicles.Tanks usually go into battle with a round in the gun, ready to fire, to minimise reaction time when encountering an enemy. The US doctrine calls for this round to be a, as the reaction time is most important when meeting enemy tanks, to get the first shot (and possibly the first kill). If troops or light vehicles are encountered, the usual response is to fire this round at them, despite it not being ideal—it is difficult and time-consuming to remove a round which is already in the. In this case, after the KE round is fired, a would normally be loaded next to continue the engagement.Tanks can be decisive in city fighting, with the ability to demolish walls and fire medium and heavy machine guns in several directions simultaneously.

However, tanks are especially vulnerable in urban combat. It is much easier for enemy infantry to sneak up behind a tank or fire at its sides, where it is most vulnerable. In addition, firing down from multi-story buildings allows shots at the thin upper turret armour and even basic weapons like, if aimed at the engine air intakes, can disable a tank. Because of these limitations, tanks are difficult to use in city conflicts where civilians or friendly forces might be nearby, since their firepower can't be used effectively.Airborne threats Tanks and other armoured vehicles are vulnerable to attack from the air for several reasons. One is that they are easily detectable—the metal they are made of shows up well on radar, and is especially obvious if they are moving in formation. A moving tank also produces a lot of heat, noise and dust. The heat makes seeing them on a system easy and the dust is a good visual clue during the day.The other major reason is that most armoured vehicles have thinner armour on the roof of the turret and on the engine deck, so an anti-tank guided missile (from an attack helicopter or ) hitting them from the top can be deadly even if it has a small warhead.

Even a small automatic cannon is powerful enough to penetrate the rear and top sections of the engine compartment of a tank. Close-up of the A-10 GAU-8 Avenger gun.Certain aircraft have been developed to attack armoured vehicles. Most notable is the purpose-built Fairchild-Republic, also known as the 'Warthog'. Although able to carry a number of different missiles and bombs (including anti-tank ordnance such as the ), the A-10's main weapon is a 30 mm which is capable of firing 3,900 armour-piercing rounds per minute (a popular belief is that the plane was actually built around the gun and not vice versa). Capable of low-speed, low-altitude flight, the A-10 is itself an airborne armoured vehicle with a enclosure about the pilot, an airframe that can survive direct hits from armour-piercing and high-explosive projectiles up to 23 mm and triple redundancy in its flight systems, with mechanical systems to back up double-redundant hydraulics. The A-10 can weather losing wings, an engine, and parts of the rear stabilizing tail and still fly.

The Russian equivalent is the. AH-64 Apache, an attack helicopter designed to destroy armoured vehicles.Similarly, a number of have been designed mainly to engage enemy armoured vehicles.

The, and are examples. Helicopters are very effective against armoured vehicles for many reasons. The AH-64D Longbow Apache, for example, is equipped with an improved sensor suite and weapon systems and the AN/APG-78 Longbow Fire Control Radar dome installed over the main rotor.Airborne threats can be countered in several ways.

This is what the United States relies on most, which is demonstrated by their distinct lack of effective short-range, mobile air defence vehicles to accompany armoured units. Most other countries accompany their armoured forces with highly mobile such as the German or the Soviet, short and medium-range systems such as the, and, or combine both on the same vehicle (the Tunguska for example can also host SAM missiles). The usage of anti-aircraft rounds fired from the main gun of a tank has been increasing over the years.

An example is the HE-FRAG round from the which can be detonated at a set distance as determined by its. Engineering support Armoured warfare is mechanically and logistically intensive and requires extensive support mechanisms. Armoured Fighting Vehicles require armoured vehicles capable of working in the same terrain to support them. These are operated by the appropriate branches of the army, e.g. Recovery and maintenance vehicles by the REME and combat engineering vehicles by the RE in the British Army. These include:. (ARV)—many of these are based on the chassis for the vehicle they support.

The ARV for the UK Challenger tank is a Challenger hull onto which a winch is added. (CEV), e.g. BulldozersFor transporting tracked AFVs over highways, heavy are used, since AFVs are prone to malfunction and their tracks also ruin the highways.Light tanks and tank destroyers. French during the phase of theWhile tanks are integral to armoured warfare, when is required, the inability to perform rapid deployment has always been a limitation of heavy.It takes a few weeks to transfer tanks and their supporting equipment by air or sea. Some tanks and armoured vehicles can be dropped by parachute, or carried by cargo airplanes or helicopters. The largest transports can only carry one or two main battle tanks.

Smaller transports can only carry or air drop light tanks and APCs such as the.The desire to create air-portable armoured vehicles that can still take on conventional MBTs has usually resulted in -armed light vehicles or in self-propelled gun style vehicles. The lack of armour protection is offset by the provision of a first-look/first-hit/first-kill capability through the mating of a powerful gun to superior targeting electronics, a concept similar to that of the US of World War II. Graphic representation of the U.S. Army's cancelledVehicles which have put such considerations into practice include the,. Most such US projects to create such vehicles have been abortive, e.g.

The most common was the flawed light tank. This was an air-portable tank capable of destroying heavier tanks using the revolutionary (for the time) 152 mm launcher. The combat effectiveness of this tank was limited by the unreliable. The latest iteration of the mobile anti-tank gun platform in American service is the, a variant equipped with; most modern militaries operate.Though limited conflicts (such as the ) rarely involve direct combat between armoured vehicles, the need to defend against insurgent attacks and has resulted in the application of armour to light vehicles and the continued use of armoured transports, fighting vehicles and tanks.See also.

The action of the game takes place in the future. The small island country of Pelaoan remained in the shadows for a long time. Everything changed when international military industry corporations located research centres and factories of modern combat robots - Vertical Armor.

The local government saw this as an opportunity to create a global power and formed the Central Pelaoan Coalition (CPC) with the intention of gaining total control over technology and production of the VA. In response, the rest of the world has set up an Alliance Defense Force to dismantle the CPC regime.The player takes on the role of one of the combat robot pilots in the service of the ADF and, together with a unit led by Colonel John Barkley, is sent to Pelaoan to inflict a decisive blow to the CPC.

After his superior and a handful of loyal soldiers show insubordination, the hero takes command of the rest of the unit. Its task is to destroy the renegades and then face up to the coalition forces.The game is based on solutions characteristic for tactical turn-based strategies. Each turn consists of several chronologically ordered stages. First there is artillery fire, then the player moves the units on the board (the unit is divided into squares) and - if possible - carries out an attack, followed by a turn of the opponent.Combat mechanics is based on the principle of paper-scissors-stone. Each robot can be equipped with two types of weaponry - sniper, machine or artillery, but the weapon is available in many different types, including range, amount of ammunition and the amount of damage inflicted.

What is important is that particular types of armour work well against a particular enemy arsenal. The use of sniper weapons is rewarded in a duel with machine guns. The latter performs better in the fight against artillery, which in turn 'beats' snipers.The creators were tempted to introduce several loans from cRPG. By participating in battles, pilots gain experience that allows them to improve their skills related to the type of units or weapons. It is also possible to acquire new types of robots (individual types differ in terms of speed of movement, durability and battery capacity) and make modifications to existing machines.The main campaign in the game is designed exclusively for solo play and includes 19 missions, in which the player most often has to occupy a specific area, reach a specific location on the map or destroy enemy units. Supporters of playing with a living opponent can try their hand at skirmish mode duels played with the hotseat method (players change at the computer).Audio-visual luminaire Metal Brigade Tactics is not particularly impressive. Two-dimensional graphics clearly stand out from the standards of modern strategy games.

The background music is based on techno songs.Please let us know if you have any comments or suggestions regarding this description.