Get rid of exsisting APC's.

[RikiRude]

i think the APCs are fine the way they are, i dont know what your talking about, all those vehicles serve different purposes. i say keep the wheeled ones but have a variety of vehicles for different maps/terrains. you can have light armoured fast wheeled ones and medium armoured slow ones.

[[R-DEV]Eddie Baker]

I can tell you now getting rid of the LAV-25 and BTR completely is not going to happen; they will be altered to make them more realistic. They may be on different maps, but that's it.

Tracked APCs and IFVs will be added later.

[six7]

This is pasted from the general discussions board.

More variations on apcs would be nice. a light class of apc could be faster and aimed more for transport and anti infantry work (lav 25 & btr 90) while the heavy apcs could be more heavily armed with anti tank compatability and more ammunition (bradly & bmp) the bradly and bmp are both much more widly used than the lav anyway...

[[R-DEV]Eddie Baker]

The Bradley, however, is not used by the US Marine Corps, which is in-game at the moment. Like I said, it is not going to be removed.

[Eagle]

I personally love the Bradley M2, I even have a model of it, and the LAV's are quite annoying in vanilla. Perhaps we should incorporate a larger spread of IFV's instead of just LAVs. Also, I thought that it would be cool if the driver could open the back doors as a sort of mobile cover for the troops inside.

[Happy]

All it would take for the Bradley(already ingame) to become the IFV Bradley would be to change the missles from AA to TOW. Of course this is all my speculation so if I am wrong I wouldn't be suprised.

[[R-DEV]Eddie Baker]

Originally Posted by Eagle

I personally love the Bradley M2, I even have a model of it, and the LAV's are quite annoying in vanilla. Perhaps we should incorporate a larger spread of IFV's instead of just LAVs.

Originally Posted by [R-DEV]Eddie Baker

Tracked APCs and IFVs will be added later.

Originally Posted by Eagle

Also, I thought that it would be cool if the driver could open the back doors as a sort of mobile cover for the troops inside.

One of the things we would like to implement with the larger APCs/IFVs is a "seatless" passenger compartment with a ramp controlled by one of the crew positions. For a vehicle as huge as the AAVP7A1 this may be feasible, but the Bradley is a tight squeeze, and we may just be better off trying to increase the passenger positions for it.

[Pence]

I know that tracked IFV's are comeing later..

you can have light armoured fast wheeled ones and medium armoured slow ones.

Take the TOW off of the APC's please! Make the infantry inside fight the Armour when they disenbark, also the cannon should not damage a tank at all.

Fast APC's in BF2 should be called bumpercars.

[Infantrigel]

Originally Posted by Pence

I know that tracked IFV's are comeing later..
Take the TOW off of the APC's please! Make the infantry inside fight the Armour when they disenbark, also the cannon should not damage a tank at all.
Fast APC's in BF2 should be called bumpercars.

Then it would just be a heavy armoured Hummer or Vodnik. I quite like the APC like they are.

[[R-DEV]Eddie Baker]

Originally Posted by Pence

Take the TOW off of the APC's please! Make the infantry inside fight the Armour when they disenbark, also the cannon should not damage a tank at all.

For the LAV-25, we will, since it is unrealistic. However, the BTR-90 does have an ATGM launcher mounted on the roof. LAV-25 does not have firing ports for embarked infantry, but the BTR-90 does. As for the auto-cannons not being able to damage a tank, that is not true, either, especially in the case of the BTR-90. The 2A42 30mm cannon fires rounds slightly smaller (30 x 164mm) than those used by the GAU-8 Avenger found in the A-10 (30 x 173mm). Just to note, this family of ammunition is used in the GsH-30 series aircraft cannons mounted in the MiG-29, Su-27 and Su-25 and the anti-aircraft cannons mounted in the 2S6 Tunguska.