Jump to content


Alright, Mammoth tanks


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
35 replies to this topic

Poll: Mammoth (92 members have cast votes)

Do mammoth tanks stand up to real life?

  1. Yes (34 votes [36.96%])

    Percentage of vote: 36.96%

  2. No (33 votes [35.87%])

    Percentage of vote: 35.87%

  3. Do I have to answer this poll? (25 votes [27.17%])

    Percentage of vote: 27.17%

Vote Hide poll

Tigerpanzer235 #1 Posted Jul 19 2011 - 01:25

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 379 battles
  • 40
  • Member since:
    06-18-2011
http://cnc.wikia.com...i/Mammoth_Mk._I
http://cnc.wikia.com...Mammoth_Mk._III
http://cnc.wikia.com...amation_Vehicle

I was iust know what you think. Yes they are best of the C@C games. IF use in real life, is it usefull?
:Smile-hiding:   :Smile-izmena:

Will_of_Iron #2 Posted Jul 19 2011 - 01:32

    Major

  • Players
  • 22251 battles
  • 3,170
  • [TF-A] TF-A
  • Member since:
    03-06-2011
PHEW! For a second there I thought you meant the P1000 and P1500. THANK YOU for it not being those :)

Now, to try to answer this. They probably would be useful but too complex. Just like WW2 German tanks they would be deadly until they broke down and took forever to be repaired.

XenomorphZZ #3 Posted Jul 19 2011 - 01:40

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 12412 battles
  • 4,663
  • [RSRC] RSRC
  • Member since:
    01-24-2011
Other than the fact the mammoth in CnC3 looked super modular...

Err I would love to see these tanks actually built, just the railgun version in CnC 3 would be AWSOME

And besides who wouldt want a tank that could shoot down aircraft... and alien capital ships :D

Tigerpanzer235 #4 Posted Jul 19 2011 - 01:45

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 379 battles
  • 40
  • Member since:
    06-18-2011

View PostWill_of_Iron, on Jul 19 2011 - 01:32, said:

PHEW! For a second there I thought you meant the P1000 and P1500. THANK YOU for it not being those :)

Now, to try to answer this. They probably would be useful but too complex. Just like WW2 German tanks they would be deadly until they broke down and took forever to be repaired.

:lol:  Also to let you know, Mammoths can some how repair by their own.
They alomst like a one man army; without anti-Infary weapons.
:Smile-izmena:

XenomorphZZ #5 Posted Jul 19 2011 - 02:06

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 12412 battles
  • 4,663
  • [RSRC] RSRC
  • Member since:
    01-24-2011
The missile were supposely anti-infantry...

Tigerpanzer235 #6 Posted Jul 19 2011 - 02:22

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 379 battles
  • 40
  • Member since:
    06-18-2011

View PostXenomorphZZ, on Jul 19 2011 - 02:06, said:

The missile were supposely anti-infantry...

The old mammoths use missiles for infantry and aircarf.....

Mammoth MkIII uses railguns for the killing...

Saytael #7 Posted Jul 19 2011 - 02:34

    Corporal

  • Beta Testers
  • 4210 battles
  • 35
  • Member since:
    09-28-2010
Unfortunately, tanks are becoming less and less practical in modern warfare.  They destroy roads by driving on them, and can't really grind over buildings as well as WOT predicts, and to mount two 120mm guns would make it weigh massive amounts, and modern tanks like the Abrams and Leopard 2 were designed for tank warfare, too roll across europe when the Cold War went hot, which it inconveniently (from a tank design POV) failed to do.  Really, with modern weapons technology, things like the M1128 [link=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M1128_Mobile_Gun_System]Mobile Gun System[/link], while less heavily armoured, are more maneuverable, smaller and cheaper.

XenomorphZZ #8 Posted Jul 19 2011 - 02:37

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 12412 battles
  • 4,663
  • [RSRC] RSRC
  • Member since:
    01-24-2011
Strykers...

Well I guess your right, its kinda like why we dont use prop planes for active combat aircraft, fighters and interceptors and such...

pershinggulf #9 Posted Jul 19 2011 - 22:56

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 185 battles
  • 466
  • Member since:
    06-19-2011
/sh-

oh no way! I don't need to kill my liver!

two-bored tanks packing 120mm guns? You'd need a larger crew to make it effective, make the tank bigger, have independent optics, possible independent targeting computers, gyroscopic stabilization systems to ensure accuracy, the tank would need to be heavier and wider, so....

Nope. But I have to disagree with everyone who says tanks will be gone or aren't useful. They still fit a purpose, and a large one at that.

XenomorphZZ #10 Posted Jul 19 2011 - 23:13

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 12412 battles
  • 4,663
  • [RSRC] RSRC
  • Member since:
    01-24-2011

View Postpershinggulf, on Jul 19 2011 - 22:56, said:

/sh-

oh no way! I don't need to kill my liver!

two-bored tanks packing 120mm guns? You'd need a larger crew to make it effective, make the tank bigger, have independent optics, possible independent targeting computers, gyroscopic stabilization systems to ensure accuracy, the tank would need to be heavier and wider, so....

Nope. But I have to disagree with everyone who says tanks will be gone or aren't useful. They still fit a purpose, and a large one at that.


For scarring the shit out of local populations? Nothing like a dozen multi-ton iron ceramic vehicles to make ya hide in your basement...

Also I think I read that these mammoth tanks had autoloaders in a sealed compartment in the back of the guns... hence its size, they also carry a lot of computer equipment supposedly...

Tigerpanzer235 #11 Posted Jul 20 2011 - 13:20

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 379 battles
  • 40
  • Member since:
    06-18-2011
:D Why i want you to be drinking Beer All day?  Anyways, you though it was over MORE MAMMOTHS! (with diff names)
Overlord, Can had a bunker, a Chain gun, And a tower. One type Has Nuclear-shells-that-fire-out-of-cannon. :arta:  :facepalmic:

Jugderdemidiin_Gurragcha #12 Posted Aug 08 2011 - 02:52

    Corporal

  • Beta Testers
  • 9304 battles
  • 34
  • [INKOS] INKOS
  • Member since:
    09-10-2010
The original Mammoth had 120mm cannons IIRC, while the C&C3 Mammoth had 150mm cannons or railguns. I'm not sure how many 150mm shells you would be able to fit inside a tank and the Mammoth MKIII has a relatively small turret and hull. It would probably need a truck following it around to reload its ammo  :D

Sadukar09 #13 Posted Aug 08 2011 - 04:36

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 19467 battles
  • 3,300
  • [-G-] -G-
  • Member since:
    02-20-2011
Mammoth Mk. IIs are awesome in Tiberian Sun, IRL they would be so useless it's morbid. One single soldier with a C4 can probably run up to it and blow the leg joints off. Missiles would work better too. If Mammoth Mk. IIIs somehow had enough radar equipment for the missile pods to take out aircraft BVR, it'd be useful, else it's just a pile of steel waiting for an A-10 strike.

Even then, heavy tanks are so 60 years ago. Soviets retired the T-10 (IS-10) heavy tank for a reason.

Lapland #14 Posted Aug 08 2011 - 04:52

    First lieutenant

  • Beta Testers
  • 7723 battles
  • 972
  • Member since:
    08-08-2010

View PostSadukar09, on Aug 08 2011 - 04:36, said:

Even then, heavy tanks are so 60 years ago. Soviets retired the T-10 (IS-10) heavy tank for a reason.

Tell that to most nations fielding Western MBTs, they're pretty damn heavy compared to their Soviet counterparts. It's like ~60 tons for the Abrams vs. ~45-50 tons for the T-90 series.

http://localhostr.co...5Vjx/Mbt-61.jpg

Type 61 MBT here, Apocalypse/Mammoth tanks is for babbies. Especially the Apocalypse tank in RA3, god that thing got such a serious nerf.

Wolfrum #15 Posted Aug 08 2011 - 21:21

    Captain

  • Players
  • 16124 battles
  • 1,074
  • [DRACS] DRACS
  • Member since:
    05-01-2011

View PostLapland, on Aug 08 2011 - 04:52, said:

Tell that to most nations fielding Western MBTs, they're pretty damn heavy compared to their Soviet counterparts. It's like ~60 tons for the Abrams vs. ~45-50 tons for the T-90 series.

http://localhostr.co...5Vjx/Mbt-61.jpg

Type 61 MBT here, Apocalypse/Mammoth tanks is for babbies. Especially the Apocalypse tank in RA3, god that thing got such a serious nerf.


As awesome as these would be, the reality is that the bigger you are the easier of a target you will be.
Modern battle arms are changing to be more mobile, cheaper, and more expendable. Due to the nature of the conflicts we face.
Much like how the Navies are downsizing to fight in more litoral areas vs the Blue Water Fleets of yesteryear.

still, its cool to dream.

-Wolf

Halcion #16 Posted Aug 21 2011 - 13:58

    Sergeant

  • Beta Testers
  • 3082 battles
  • 121
  • Member since:
    08-05-2010
The logistics of getting these monsters from A to B would kill them dead. Hell shipping the Abrams around nearly put them into theorized obsolescence with the US Army.

markodash #17 Posted Aug 22 2011 - 01:28

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 12855 battles
  • 451
  • [DFCN5] DFCN5
  • Member since:
    04-13-2011

View PostHalcion, on Aug 21 2011 - 13:58, said:

The logistics of getting these monsters from A to B would kill them dead. Hell shipping the Abrams around nearly put them into theorized obsolescence with the US Army.

the answer to that is simple...       you make the transports (ships, aircraft, etc.) and infrastructure (roads, bridges, tunnels, etc) BIGGER!   :D


out of the C&C mammoths i prefer the Mammoth MK I and the Red Alert 2 Apocalypse, because they don't look completely ridiculous. though there is physiological value in a horde of multiple-hundred ton invincible death machines as demonstrated in this excerpt from possibly the best C&C3 fanfiction, wherein the MK III Mammoth gets posibly it's finist hour.

Tiberium Wars  here's the relevant bits from various chapters in order, it's quite long and fairly graphic so i'm sticking it under a spoiler tag.

Spoiler                     


XenomorphZZ #18 Posted Aug 23 2011 - 03:58

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 12412 battles
  • 4,663
  • [RSRC] RSRC
  • Member since:
    01-24-2011

View PostLapland, on Aug 08 2011 - 04:52, said:

Tell that to most nations fielding Western MBTs, they're pretty damn heavy compared to their Soviet counterparts. It's like ~60 tons for the Abrams vs. ~45-50 tons for the T-90 series.

http://localhostr.co...5Vjx/Mbt-61.jpg

Type 61 MBT here, Apocalypse/Mammoth tanks is for babbies. Especially the Apocalypse tank in RA3, god that thing got such a serious nerf.

-stares at the MS IGLOO in the top right of the image-

You do realize these tanks literally got stepped on right?

Lapland #19 Posted Aug 23 2011 - 04:19

    First lieutenant

  • Beta Testers
  • 7723 battles
  • 972
  • Member since:
    08-08-2010

View PostXenomorphZZ, on Aug 23 2011 - 03:58, said:

-stares at the MS IGLOO in the top right of the image-

You do realize these tanks literally got stepped on right?

More like they held off the technologically superior Zeon MS forces for 1/4th of the One Year War and continued to supplement the Fed's ground MSs well into it.

Tiger_23 #20 Posted Aug 23 2011 - 05:16

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 8631 battles
  • 10,137
  • [1_BCB] 1_BCB
  • Member since:
    07-27-2010
C & C Apocalypse tank , i love he