The BMP3/Bradley, tactics?

[Nebsif]

IMO, the Bradley is only good for ambushing, my record on kashan in 087 was 8 tanks + bmps w/o dying once, mostly by simply hiding behind stuff in the eastern part of the map (wide open desert) and waiting for enemy armor.
The BMP.. Its like a mini tank with badass weaponry, good for rushing bunkarz, less good for ambushing enemy armor than the brad.

[Truism]

Use them as armoured recce with a small detachment of mounted infantry if you really want to get the "teamplay" buzz.

Basically get behind the conventional lines, ambush things, kill stuff, stay safe. Stay moving.


No matter what anyone tells you, this is the only way to use the APCs in PR. They act as cavalry, not fire support vehicles.

[wookimonsta]

Well, it is actually possible to have armor stay together on pubs, seen it happen a few times.

First off, don't be a douche. Don't take one of these apcs AND a hat kit. I've seen this countless time because it gives you the advantage of using less easily spotted infantry to engage enemy armor. This seems nice and all until you realize its a bloody big map and there are only two hat kits available. You already have one of the strongest AT weapons at your disposal, don't deprive your infantry squads of their AT capabilities.
The idea is to spread the AT capabilites around a little, that way if you die, we don't loose both at once, and inf isn't 100% reliant on you to take out armor.


Basically however, I prefer to use the BMP/Bradley to ambush enemy armored vehicles as opposed to transporting inf (in most cases, if there is no other transport available, I will of course do this). This is because taking out large chunks of enemy armor is a huge relief for your team, as well as a big ticket loss for the enemy team.

[dtacs]

Originally Posted by smiley

So we're back to "zerging" is a great tactic?...............hmmmm.

There is a difference between zerging and speed & agility. Zerging would involve everybody, assetless, rushing the flag without the intent of staying safe and tactical and just capping the flag with sheer numbers, regardless of deaths. A good example of this is that video that popped up awhile ago of the human blob formation on Mestia, where the team moved around in one huge group without caring for deaths bar a few medics.

The tactic he was talking about however is simply having the instacap mindset, having a group ready on every next flag to be able to cap it. This works on larger maps very well.

Originally Posted by Hunt3r

I don't know if the BMP and Bradley can do this in Kashan though...

Can anyone say?

No, they can not. I tend to find that with the increased firepower the Bradley and BMP on maps like Silent Eagle tend to become fire support vehicles or tankhunters instead of their infantry-carrying nature (plus on Kashan, mechanized doesn't work because there isn't cover which infantry need after they dismount). BTR-80A is the best vehicle for mechanized, I would take the BTR-80A over anything, anytime, anywhere, any map thanks to its speed, incredibly small turning circle, and ROF on the 30mm main cannon.

Simply the best.

[Froggy]

Yo dog, you guys know there's a while fork for this kinda stuff? If you go to AARs then in that forum there is a tactics forum.

[TheOldBreed]

in an ideal PR world, there'd be CAAT teams as well as everyone working together in a combined arms fashion. where an OPFOR tries to react to one threat, it'll make him vulnerable to another.

however throughout my 2 and a bit years of playing PR, this has only happened like once haha. Like you said, on a pub server, it's impossible.

[smiley]

Originally Posted by dtacs

There is a difference between zerging and speed & agility. Zerging would involve everybody, assetless, rushing the flag without the intent of staying safe and tactical and just capping the flag with sheer numbers, regardless of deaths. A good example of this is that video that popped up awhile ago of the human blob formation on Mestia, where the team moved around in one huge group without caring for deaths bar a few medics.

The tactic he was talking about however is simply having the instacap mindset, having a group ready on every next flag to be able to cap it. This works on larger maps very well.


No, they can not. I tend to find that with the increased firepower the Bradley and BMP on maps like Silent Eagle tend to become fire support vehicles or tankhunters instead of their infantry-carrying nature (plus on Kashan, mechanized doesn't work because there isn't cover which infantry need after they dismount). BTR-80A is the best vehicle for mechanized, I would take the BTR-80A over anything, anytime, anywhere, any map thanks to its speed, incredibly small turning circle, and ROF on the 30mm main cannon.

Simply the best.

Sorry but i disagree but thanks for the assumption that i didn't understand what he meant. For me and it's just my opinion this kind of charging around the map is what kills off games and doesn't allow for any immersion. It is only your opinion of the definition of that made up word and therefore doesn't necessarily have to mean the whole team. For me zerging means getting the biggest and most powerful tool at your disposal and charging up the map hoping to mow people down who are just getting set up.
Sorry but it's the oldest trick in internet gaming, doesn't require any thought or cleverness and usually is employed by people under the age of 20 who cant wait to finish a map in 20 mins and then complain that it's boring or to boast about how they pwned the other team.
This i reasoned by his use of the term "blitzkrieg" or lightning war if you prefer.

[Sirex[SWE][MoW]]

Okay i see a lot of uninformed unsupported opinouns thrown around here, so i will try to clear something out.

1. There is a difference between an APC and an IFV and their respective uses. The first one is a mobile bunker with an added machingun the other one is a minitank with completary support infantry.

2. Mechanised infantry does not equal IFV supporting infantry, it equals the opposite which is infantry supporting the IFV. That is a very big difference.


An APC squad should use the APC as a mobile bunker and fast taxi vehicle, in engagment it should only be used to cover with its HMG from afar out of engagment range from enemy LAT. Actaully i would be in favor of using APC as dedicated ferry vehicle with ability to recover infantry from hotzones which a truck can't, also that it got offroad capability. This is more inline of what the avreaged Joe picture of mechanised infantry is.

An IFV on the other hand is a offensive weapon with a respectable main automated cannon that has it's irl streangth of being nimbler, which means that it can move more agile in broken terrain like forrest compeared to a tank, and got their completarry infantry. In my military service my Platoon Leader (rank Lieutenant) estimated that atleast 50% of the targets they spooted where spotted by the infantry in open hatch mode and atlesat only 50% was spotted by the vehicle crew. This is actually one of the primary mission for the mechanised infantry, observe enemys and report in to the Crew chief in open hatch mode.

A main use if IFV in mobile warfare is that it's smaller size and being more agile allows it to cost effective fight tanks in forrest by ambushing and moving around. Do not interpert ambush as defensive, you can be very offensive and still use ambush, or more like manouriver around the enemy and getting in the flanks and behind them, Here the infantry should be used as observers or as a stationary firepoint, the infantry dismount move forward with their LAT ready and act as a mobile firebase that can report target and kill targets of oppertunities.

The paradox here is that the actuall biggest threat to a IFV is infantry with LAT in broken terrain (since IFV has armorue that is vounrable to LAT even in front compeard to the heavy amroru of a tank), then the IFV needs dismoputed infantry support. By dismounting it's infantry and having them move infront of the IFV to spot and kill enemy LAT gunners or camoflagued AFV.

So in short IFV infantry uses are:

1. Observer from unhatch mode and report targets to the wagon cheif.

2. Clear out dangerous broken terrain from enemy threats to the IFV (includes urban terrain).

3. Act as a anchor defence or a anchor offensive fire unit that the IFV can swarm around and using it's mobility while the infantry provide security in their firesector.

Use of IFV is to assaulting on a big scale and having the capability to deal with threats that tanks have problem with, like broken terrain, forrets, urban terrain, and being cost effective. For really big infantry duties you have APC and heavy motorised infantry to use, not IFV infantry, since theres a big difference in endurance between a standard 12 man squad and the smaller 6 man sqaud that usually is standard in IFV.

So the wording. dtacs: "No, they can not. I tend to find that with the increased firepower the Bradley and BMP on maps like Silent Eagle tend to become fire support vehicles or tankhunters instead of their infantry-carrying nature (plus on Kashan, mechanized doesn't work because there isn't cover which infantry need after they dismount)."
Is wrong since the poster has misunderstood the nature of mechanised infantry warfare for IFV.

To prove my point i was a Squad leader over a IFV squad, one driver, one gunner, me Officer, and one LAT + rifelmens. And when we were in danger i orderd dismount, then we the ifnantry moved coutuisly infornt with LAT fire ready and the IFV 50 meters behind us. We saw a tank, called halt on the IFV, the tank charged from right ot left never saw us. And then our IFV came up and killed it in the back.

And for the critizism i am going to recive i would like that you present evidence in some form, i have 11 month mechanised infantry training so i won't accept that some convertet vanilla bf2 just say "nuuohh you re wrong!!one!".

[Hunt3r]

TBH, the Bradley and BMP 3 are battle taxis. Get over it, because the fact that they cannot sustain much combat damage beyond light small arms and autocannon means that they will be very weak against tanks, unless you ambush.

Yes, PR is all about rushing the flags as much as you can in early game, because that's just simply how AAS is set up. We just prefer to call it blitzkrieg.

The IFV should be immediately exited by all but the driver to try and get as many people actively capping the first known safe flag. As soon as that is accomplished, you immediately all get back in, dash to the next flag, everyone helps with the cap effort at the bunkers. After that, the IFV should leave the infantry alone, and instead have all armor rush to the other side of bunkers to prevent capping by the enemy and to defeat enemy armor. They should, however, get inside a bunker to get ready to cap, and to make an ambush by having the drivers get out and help with the cap effort.

Ensure that those who are taking alternate transport set up firebases to help with defense. Ensure that once both bunkers are capped, that there are firebases reasonably close to the flags. Then, one or two squads get back into the IFVs, and IFV/tanks move out, going straight to the enemy village, all infantry out, and armor immediately should start taking up defensive positions, blowing up the village statics to clear out all enemies, ensure that armor is gone.

Once you cap, infantry all load back into the IFVs, tanks and IFVs then immediately go to the outpost, and cap. From there, just wait, establish your firebases, and fortify them. Light victory cigar, feel proud for your side.

As a side note, getting a tank into the bunkers are pretty much impossible in the central bunker areas.

[RedAlertSF]

In my opinion, IFVs are great for offensive tactics when used in pairs. The best thing about Bradley or BMP-3 is that they're armed with that TOW missile. A tank won't necessarily go down from one TOW hit, but they definitely go down from two.

IFVs are also great for troop transportation, which is good because IFVs just need cover when they are in constructed environment. These things are very effective, but their armor is light so you have to be careful.