NATN-Issue 2-[Tanki vs...]-Tanki vs. reality

[canadian_tank 226]

Hey tankers, welcome back, so today I am making my first tanki vs..., do you want me to continue the series? If I get 15 differences in the poll by next issue, I will make another one but anyways let's start!

 

1. You spawning?

 

 

So one of the thing that is not even close to reality is spawning, I know that it is indeed a must but 1 of the many things that never happens in real life so here's what will happen if there was no spawning and you had to not die

and yes, that was when i started tanki and that means that according to my research, the highest rank some got to without dieing is , so good luck getting to

 

 

 

2. The turrets (guns)

 

 

So I know most of the turrets do exist in real life but here are the ones that are beyond our current capabilities

-Isida

-Freeze

-Thunder

Now why didn't I mention shaft and rail?

It's because according to USnews.com, the US navy is testing it read more here

And why thunder? That's because I checked and I concluded that no splash gun exist! (Why would the US bother to try when the splash damage won't do anything?)

 

 

 

3. The statics

Now in the easy way: You can't see how many people you opponent killed!

 

Now yes that was short but I wanna see how many views i get before continuing so if you want more, like this, i will continue it if i get 15 differences in yes and no before January 15th, friday

Edited January 2, 2016 by canadian_tank

[BlueDragon_tamki 3,204]

Ok..

[fordmustang12345 3,910]

Nice article. But thunder is actually similar to a motar

[Quarks 2,255]

Nice article. But thunder is actually similar to a motar

I would beg to differ. Sure, it is similar to a mortar, but there are multiple cases of exploding rounds used. First, go back to the 1700's, cannons used by the English exploded. Also, early WW1/ WW2 used high explosive artillery units, along with many early tanks. Even today, there are HESH(High explosive Squash head), which are, obviously, explosive, like thunder.

[Reeco9 1,567]

And why thunder? That's because I checked and I concluded that no splash gun exist! (Why would the US bother to try when the splash damage won't do anything?)

Well, you could consider anything explosive to have splash damage really. Think missiles or howitzers. I'd say that 'splash guns' do exist.

[hhgb 2,655]

Well, you could consider anything explosive to have splash damage really. Think missiles or howitzers. I'd say that 'splash guns' do exist.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HNC4sVmJR1o

 

If that isn't "splash" I'm not sure what it is to you.

[canadian_tank 226]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HNC4sVmJR1o

 

If that isn't "splash" I'm not sure what it is to you.

Yeah, but tanki has a gun that splashes and can kill

In reality, you would have to hit it our else, if you hit nearby, a explosion? sure, damage? a few pieces of metal that does nothing

I checked, it would be a real waste of money buying the missile to splash, especially a M4SSA1 W33 (nuclear weapon) or a W79 (nuclear artillery shell) which costs a fortune so i think you guys shall stop the big debate

[Zenyth 6,494]

Thunder is similar to mortars/cannons.

[GHOST68INVINCIBLE 152]

Wait is there a turret like hammer in real life tank?

[dilsharox 2,395]

How can thunder be beyond our capabilities? And there is fun similar to flame thrower which is freeze thrower

[Zenyth 6,494]

Wait is there a turret like hammer in real life tank?

Sh0tgunz

[Reeco9 1,567]

Well, you could consider anything explosive to have splash damage really. Think missiles or howitzers. I'd say that 'splash guns' do exist.

 

 

(vid)

 

If that isn't "splash" I'm not sure what it is to you.

What's your point?

You're just agreeing with what I said.

[Reeco9 1,567]

Yeah, but tanki has a gun that splashes and can kill

In reality, you would have to hit it our else, if you hit nearby, a explosion? sure, damage? a few pieces of metal that does nothing

I checked, it would be a real waste of money buying the missile to splash, especially a M4SSA1 W33 (nuclear weapon) or a W79 (nuclear artillery shell) which costs a fortune so i think you guys shall stop the big debate

If a high calibre explosive shell landed next to a tank for example, the occupants would likely be vaporized by the shockwave, so there's that. Also, the 'few pieces of metal' would be heated shrapnel flying at high velocities - capable of tearing through thinner armour.

[canadian_tank 226]

How can thunder be beyond our capabilities? And there is fun similar to flame thrower which is freeze thrower

Yes, i considered that fact but no weapon that shots snow can kill as of current abilities

[canadian_tank 226]

If a high calibre explosive shell landed next to a tank for example, the occupants would likely be vaporized by the shockwave, so there's that. Also, the 'few pieces of metal' would be heated shrapnel flying at high velocities - capable of tearing through thinner armour.

True but I I mean it will kill the crew and everything but it won't explode for any reasons because the fuel tank has nothing to burn of (something to fuel the fire) which in tanki it will cause explosion 

[Quarks 2,255]

True but I I mean it will kill the crew and everything but it won't explode for any reasons because the fuel tank has nothing to burn of (something to fuel the fire) which in tanki it will cause explosion 

but the tank would be out of action, and that is very important.

[thunder_da_best 24]

?x00

[canadian_tank 226]

but the tank would be out of action, and that is very important.

Yes but in tanki, the tank is burned

[Quarks 2,255]

Yes but in tanki, the tank is burned

irl I would have a 3rd degree burn.

[canadian_tank 226]

Guess not

[NatchGa 665]

I feel like this was all common sense, however, if you added some interesting facts that would be surprising, than it maybe a nice article.