What IFV would you pick to be made playable

[Marko]

Again, not trying to influence anything or anybody

Just like polls even political ones, LoL

So what IFV would you like to see made playable I will include some newer types

You will only be able to make one choice.

This should be interesting I genuinely have no idea what will top the poll.

So far I was correct in guessing the M-60 would come out on top for the MBT.

[GreenSmoke]

BMP-1 through 3.

[TSe419E]

M113 in all its early variations.

[Grenny]

M113 in all its early variations.

There already is a sh*tload of M113's playable ;-)

[Kingtiger]

Marder without exception. That is one IFV we been waiting forever to get playable.

[PaleRider]

Marder without exception. That is one IFV we been waiting forever to get playable.

I concur!

[MDF]

Again, not trying to influence anything or anybody

Just like polls even political ones, LoL

So what IFV would you like to see made playable I will include some newer types

You will only be able to make one choice.

This should be interesting I genuinely have no idea what will top the poll.

So far I was correct in guessing the M-60 would come out on top for the MBT.

Marko,

You beat me to the punch.... somewhat. I'm going to create an online poll via Google Docs. The poll will work in the following manner. There will be 10 questions. Each question will be identical -- a list of all (or at least most) of the "usual suspects"; pick the one you'd like to see made crewable in SB. In effect, you'll have 10 votes. If, for example, you want a playable Leclerc above all else, you can use all 10 votes for the Leclerc. just select "Leclerc" in each of the 10 questions. Or you can vote for 10 different vehicles. Or any combination of weighting that you desire.

Before I create the poll, I'll post the list of vehicles to make sure I'm not missing any serious candidates. I'm going to include things like T-90 and Chinese vehicles even though it's unlikely that there is enough public info to model them.

I suspect this is all just idle chatter. But who knows...maybe it will prove useful to eSim in some manner.

[MDF]

Marder without exception. That is one IFV we been waiting forever to get playable.

I also concur. Cold War CENTAG/NORTHAG's largest ground force doesn't have a crewable IFV? :c:

[macieksoft]

M2A3 and BMP-3.

M2A3 is a very large improvement over M2A2 ODS(E). It has completely new FCS (with lead prediction), new thermals (better thermal for gunner, and independent one for commander), auto target tracking, BCIS and i heard that it can be equipped with MCD and LWS in combat (those devices are not equipped during training).

BMP-3 has a serious gun! It can fire missiles and HE-FRAG ammo! It also has 30mm one with double feed (like BMP-2) + coax + 2 MGs operated by troops in forward compartment (from inside). Its cool, i want it. It has thermal and laser rangefinder (AFAIK it also serves as designator for a missiles).

And i think that we have enough playable IFVs without ATGM (even way too many of them), the only one that has missiles and is playable is a Bradley ODS, so why not to make A3 one? And a next IFV MUST have missiles, because its crazy how many ducks we have now, we should have something else to eat just like in a good restaurant. No more ducks please! Serve us ATGM now!

AND NO! No Marder! Its cannon is only 20mm! Its even worse than Bradley... And its missile is operated from exterior, ITS A DUCK, its armed with a ducky missile that requires you to get your ducky head out of the hatch!!! Its still DUCK and i do not want any more ducks i said!

[Hedgehog]

Mackiesoft's rant aside.

Marder and/or BMP-2

[Grenny]

...

Marder and/or BMP2

(my bold)

I'm glad that you, and already 9 others have realized whats the bestest IFV in the world.

[Marko]

Marko,

You beat me to the punch.... somewhat. I'm going to create an online poll via Google Docs. The poll will work in the following manner. There will be 10 questions. Each question will be identical -- a list of all (or at least most) of the "usual suspects"; pick the one you'd like to see made crewable in SB. In effect, you'll have 10 votes. If, for example, you want a playable Leclerc above all else, you can use all 10 votes for the Leclerc. just select "Leclerc" in each of the 10 questions. Or you can vote for 10 different vehicles. Or any combination of weighting that you desire.

Before I create the poll, I'll post the list of vehicles to make sure I'm not missing any serious candidates. I'm going to include things like T-90 and Chinese vehicles even though it's unlikely that there is enough public info to model them.

I suspect this is all just idle chatter. But who knows...maybe it will prove useful to eSim in some manner.

Hi MDF.

By all means go ahead with your poll

I was going to run a poll on what new Arty systems would members like to see in game

AS-90 /MLRS etc. But as you stated my polls are just a bit of fun

A properly prepared poll mite be more beneficial to the community.

[Tacbat]

I'm partial to the Marder, but having the BMP's made playable would be a nice enhancement as well, if you like that sort of thing.

[mpow66m]

i went with Marder,but i think we need BMP1/2 and more Txxs playable.more AAA for BLUFOR too.and gas.

[TSe419E]

There already is a sh*tload of M113's playable ;-)

Yes, there are. But not the variants I am looking for. I am looking for more things from the 1978 to 1983 period.

Which includes Marders and BMPs.

[macieksoft]

Hi MDF.

By all means go ahead with your poll

I was going to run a poll on what new Arty systems would members like to see in game

AS-90 /MLRS etc. But as you stated my polls are just a bit of fun

A properly prepared poll mite be more beneficial to the community.

MLRS would not be too useful in PRO PE because there is a map size limit. Aprox 20x20 kilometers so there would be a problems with MLRS as it has big minimum range. Basically targets would be too close to be engaged by MLRS so you would be forced to put MLRS at the corners of the map so you could have at least a little coverage. I am not sure about the junk like BM-21 but M270 MLRS has a really huge minimum and maximum range. You would never use the advantage of its maximum range in SB but you will always have problems with its minimum range.

I think that laser guided Copperhead artillery round, or a BONUS munition would be nice here if we talking about arty.

There already is a sh*tload of M113's playable

There is even illegal variant. Its a tactical smoke generator with red cross on it. AI is using this fake MEDEVAC vehicle to provide smokescreen cover for supply truck convoys and AFVs. They really forcing me to shoot at them as instead of providing MEDEVAC they providing smoke cover for a convoy.

and gas.

Yep, give us gas, let us be a Hitler!

OFC there will be a reason to use NBC protection!

What about gasmasks for infantry, they will look like pigs or elephants depending on mask type!

[12Alfa]

MLRS as it has big minimum range, yes 15 km, so it will still work with most if not all maps, where are you getting your info??:c:

[12Alfa]

There is even There is even illegal variant. Its a tactical smoke generator with red cross on it. AI is using this fake MEDEVAC vehicle to provide smokescreen cover for supply truck convoys and AFVs. They really forcing me to shoot at them as instead of providing MEDEVAC they providing smoke cover for a convoy.. Its a tactical smoke generator with red cross on it. AI is using this fake MEDEVAC vehicle to provide smokescreen cover for supply truck convoys and AFVs. They really forcing me to shoot at them as instead of providing MEDEVAC they providing smoke cover for a convoy.

Your using it wrong, or don't understand the deployment/tactics/importance of the AFV of this illegal variant . And by what/who's standards is it illegal :confused:

[macieksoft]

15km is a very big range that forces you to put all launchers at the borders of the map and attack only enemies that are at the second end of map.

So its basically spawn war, you place launchers at spawn and shoot at enemy spawn!

In normal conditions enemies are moving and they are not always at the borders of the map, same thing with launchers.

Such minimum range do not allows you to freely place units, you have to place both (launchers and enemies) at the borders which is a big limitation.

It would be good when map wound be in example 40x40km or bigger to do not force MLRS to go "knife fighting" range which is unrealistic. They are not designed to engage targets 20km away, even when they can do it, its like shooting tanks from 50 meters. Its possible, but its not a correct tactics!

If they put MLRS they should first make us able to use its advantages (i mean the big range). Forcing players to fight them using its minimum range is like making 100x100 meters map and play it in M1A2. Its possible to play on such small map in M1A2, but it makes no sense for me.

Your using it wrong, or don't understand the deployment/tactics/importance of the AFV of this illegal variant . And by what/who's standards is it illegal

I do not using it, the AI is using it. So not me but AI is doing it wrong. Please read post before trying to quote it.

And AFAIK MEDEVAC vehicles with red cross on it are not allowed to take part in a combat.

Deploying smoke screen to protect trucks and AFVs in the convoy from laser rangefinders and my day sights its not a action that MEDEVAC vehicles are allowed to do.

They are doing everything to force me to shoot at them! I was forced to kill them before i was able to engage convoy (LRF could not break trough smoke and same thing with daysights).

[12Alfa]

15km is a very big range that forces you to put all launchers at the borders of the map and attack only enemies that are at the second end of map.

So its basically spawn war, you place launchers at spawn and shoot at enemy spawn!

In normal conditions enemies are moving and they are not always at the borders of the map, same thing with launchers.

Such minimum range do not allows you to freely place units, you have to place both (launchers and enemies) at the borders which is a big limitation.

It would be good when map wound be in example 40x40km or bigger to do not force MLRS to go "knife fighting" range which is unrealistic. They are not designed to engage targets 20km away, even when they can do it, its like shooting tanks from 50 meters. Its possible, but its not a correct tactics!

If they put MLRS they should first make us able to use its advantages (i mean the big range). Forcing players to fight them using its minimum range is like making 100x100 meters map and play it in M1A2. Its possible to play on such small map in M1A2, but it makes no sense for me.

I do not using it, the AI is using it. So not me but AI is doing it wrong. Please read post before trying to quote it.

And AFAIK MEDEVAC vehicles with red cross on it are not allowed to take part in a combat. ( no shit)

Deploying smoke screen to protect trucks and AFVs in the convoy from laser rangefinders and my day sights its not a action that MEDEVAC vehicles are allowed to do.

They are doing everything to force me to shoot at them! I was forced to kill them before i was able to engage convoy (LRF could not break trough smoke and same thing with daysights). Ever try to re-locate?:heu:

Again, you are using the AFV/MRLS wrong, seems like I can't make you understand so I'll move on.

Also the medics can be controlled (in the editor), you are most likly again using them wrong, and it seems like this is not getting through to you.

So, I see that any help is not going to work here :c:, so I'll follow Gibson's method :luxhello:

[macieksoft]

The mission with MEDEVAC smokers was not mine so i do not messed too much in editor.

And what i am doing wrong with MLRS? You probably do not understand that MLRS was not designed to engage targets 20km away, even when it can do it.

MLRS was designed to provide quick and standoff engagement. 20km for the MLRS is a knife fighting range. You should avoid using MLRS when you are as close to enemy. MLRS is good on long ranges, as its quite safe way to attack enemy. When enemy is approaching your launcher and is just 20 clicks from you you should look out for a place to fall back or you can also count on your buddies who will probably defend you.

MLRS was not designed to be on the front line, it is usually staying behind the lines in a safe distance and provides support for buddies who are directing its fire on enemy position. If you are excessively using MLRS to fire at enemies 20km away you really doing it wrong because you do not use its tactical advantages. MLRS is not a tank, its artillery! It cannot defend itself! So you can only count on your buddies, or stay away from enemies

[Grenny]

The mission with MEDEVAC smokers was not mine so i do not messed too much in editor.

And what i am doing wrong with MLRS? You probably do not understand that MLRS was not designed to engage targets 20km away, even when it can do it.

MLRS was designed to provide quick and standoff engagement. 20km for the MLRS is a knife fighting range. You should avoid using MLRS when you are as close to enemy. MLRS is good on long ranges, as its quite safe way to attack enemy. When enemy is approaching your launcher and is just 20 clicks from you you should look out for a place to fall back or you can also count on your buddies who will probably defend you.

MLRS was not designed to be on the front line, it is usually staying behind the lines in a safe distance and provides support for buddies who are directing its fire on enemy position. If you are excessively using MLRS to fire at enemies 20km away you really doing it wrong because you do not use its tactical advantages. MLRS is not a tank, its artillery! It cannot defend itself! So you can only count on your buddies, or stay away from enemies

So where will the MRLS be, 20 km+ behind the "front line"?

[macieksoft]

I think there is no need for MLRS in SB at all. Because we cannot use its advantages as long as we have limited map size.

For current map sizes howitzers are enough, or maybe sometimes even a bit more than enough as they can cover whole map (at least some of them can do it, especially the ones with range 30km+). They do not have such a big minimum range restrictions.

So basically mortars and howitzers are OK in SB PRO PE, they are useful. But it makes no sense at all to implement MLRS here as we will not be able to use it the way it should be used.

[Grenny]

One of its very useful abilitirs is the much bigger payload compared to tube arty.

But back to my question: where do you think MRLS are deployed?

[macieksoft]

You can also get a big payload on target shooting many rounds from conventional arty. At least you don't have to waste a lot of space for a giant rocket motors that are really useful only when you shooting at large distance.

And its much easier to carry rounds for conventional arty than carry rockets for MLRS! Yes they can fire them quickly but they will need a relatively long and complicated reload when compared to conventional arty. Look at the containers in M270, they are huge, they need a special equipment to reload and transport them. For conventional arty any kind of truck would be good.

You can even try to use a bear: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wojtek_%28bear%29

And MLRS can be deployed in any place that is far enough from FLOT to be safe and close enough to target to be able to put the rockets on it. Remember that MLRS used to be more fragile (less armored) than howitzers and MLRS launchers cannot defend themselves unlike some types of howitzers that can do direct fire in emergency.