PDA

View Full Version : BTR-60 passengers


SnakeTheFox
2012-07-14, 00:07
The BTR-60 is one of the few true armored personnel carriers in the game. Unlike IFVs like the Warrior, Bradley, or BMP-3, the BTR-60 has a rather paltry amount of armor and a dinky little 14.5mm HMG ("dinky" relative to an APDS-spewing autocannon, at least). Why then, has it literally been made the worst vehicle in this game at carrying personnel?

Honestly, I feel safer riding in a Ural. At least you can't hear it coming from a mile away, and it offers a bit more protection to dismounts. I understand a number of pictures exist here and there of soldiers riding on the outside of BTRs, but I think it's safe to say this is almost always done far and away from a direct combat zone, and especially not in a cramped urban warfare area like Muttrah.

The BTR-60 is just silly right now, and honestly the inclusion of exterior passenger slots is probably the only thing in PR I can think of that is actually a step backwards from vBF2 insofar as realism. It's aesthetically amusing for about 2 minutes before an errant SAW gunner strips your whole squad off like peeling a banana. Just ridiculous.

I feel it just encourages non-realism. A BTR-60 is an APC, not an IFV, yet it plays less like an APC than any of the IFVs in the game currently. It should be spending the majority of its time carrying infantry, providing fire support when necessary. The current configuration just encourages the opposite, I rarely see BTR-60's carrying infantry anymore, and they seem to just spend 99% of their time pod racing down Muttrah streets, trying to catch Hueys off their guard and dog fighting with Amtracs. I understand the BTR-60 is on other maps, but Muttrah is doubtlessly its most famous and forefront representation in the game. It's usually not too different on other maps, just replace "pod racing down streets" with "pod racing through trees".

Ragnarok1775
2012-07-14, 02:10
Nations that use(d) Soviet equipment generally had no regard for the lives of their troops anyway, only for winning the battle, which is why it was so common to see people piled on top of tanks, BMPs, BTRs, etc. Or, in the case of Iraq, they were so happy to be liberated that people piled up on top of their vehicles so they could meet with and surrender US forces much faster. From a tactical standpoint of trying to stay alive to accomplish the mission, it sounds stupid. But, from a dictator's perspective, throwing as much meat into the grinder as you can will produce enough enemy casualties to break their morale and win the war. In this game you can't play with their tactics, because suicide isn't rewarding and the enemy doesn't have 10x as many troops as the US.

Scared_420
2012-07-14, 02:40
Nations that use(d) Soviet equipment generally had no regard for the lives of their troops anyway, only for winning the battle, which is why it was so common to see people piled on top of tanks, BMPs, BTRs, etc. Or, in the case of Iraq, they were so happy to be liberated that people piled up on top of their vehicles so they could meet with and surrender US forces much faster. From a tactical standpoint of trying to stay alive to accomplish the mission, it sounds stupid. But, from a dictator's perspective, throwing as much meat into the grinder as you can will produce enough enemy casualties to break their morale and win the war. In this game you can't play with their tactics, because suicide isn't rewarding and the enemy doesn't have 10x as many troops as the US.

Agreed,

would be nice on some 64 player maps if it was 30 vs 90 (normandy)

ShockUnitBlack
2012-07-14, 02:48
While the Russians may in real-life be able to justify having soldiers ride on top of APCs rather than in them, in PR it is indisputably better to be in the APC than outside of it. Case closed.

The BTR-60, by the way, serves as more of a gun platform than an APC in PR because it is the only vehicle the MEC has on Muttrah City that can effectively kill helicopters. Because of this and because the BTR-60 is only featured, to my knowledge, on Muttrah City (which isn't a great map for APCs at the best of times) and Kozelsk (where it plays a fairly negligable role on the battlefield), it doesn't get a very good reputation.

=HCM= Shwedor
2012-07-14, 03:49
Pretty sure it is featured on Jabal as well. But it really is garbage for anything but killing helicopters at the moment, for killing helicopters it is MUCH better than AA... and the AA is probably better at killing infantry in PR. Completely backwards.... Not to mention as stated that one SAW gunner can rape the entire load of infantry off the side of the vehicle, and the BTR can't fight back because its gun has the WORST elevation ever. Not to mention if an AT hits the vehicle while infantry are mounted. Unless the US guys are complete retards and stand in the middle of the road jumping up and down they won't get killed by a BTR and the BTR will never know what hit it.

40mmrain
2012-07-14, 04:52
the AA only gets a shit rep, because it's against the hueys and their stupidly high health, it's plenty accurate, really.

The thing is, in PR, APCs are never really used for transporting inf, which is fine, theyre mobile fire support platforms. I really dont see it as a problem.

Though that line "like peeling a banana" was brilliant, where did you come up with that, op?

SnakeTheFox
2012-07-14, 04:56
Nations that use(d) Soviet equipment generally had no regard for the lives of their troops anyway, only for winning the battle, which is why it was so common to see people piled on top of tanks, BMPs, BTRs, etc. Or, in the case of Iraq, they were so happy to be liberated that people piled up on top of their vehicles so they could meet with and surrender US forces much faster. From a tactical standpoint of trying to stay alive to accomplish the mission, it sounds stupid. But, from a dictator's perspective, throwing as much meat into the grinder as you can will produce enough enemy casualties to break their morale and win the war. In this game you can't play with their tactics, because suicide isn't rewarding and the enemy doesn't have 10x as many troops as the US.

Regardless as to whether that's an action committed on a real battlefield (I'm still not convinced it happens frequently enough outside of non-combat transport, not when you're within a kilometer of an enemy army), it doesn't have any place in PR unless we're also going to start requiring all Taliban/Militia fire blindly and inaccurately so as to represent their poor training as well. The MEC isn't even a real faction anyway, it wouldn't be hard at all to justify them using semi-proper tactics.

The BTR-60, by the way, serves as more of a gun platform than an APC in PR because it is the only vehicle the MEC has on Muttrah City that can effectively kill helicopters.

Best AA on Muttrah a BTR? Have you even seen the beast, lol?

Thermis
2012-07-14, 08:15
New Asymmetrical balancing idea are one of the things that we are working on.

And you are correct the BTR is a APC and not comparable to the Bradley or Warrior in firepower. But it was never designed to stack up against those specific Nato counterparts, it was designed to get troops from A to B quickly and safe from small arms fire. The BMPs are the Russian made IFVs.

The concept of troops riding outside the vehicles has a lot of factors. Yes it does happen in actually war zones, and yes it does happen in combat areas. What it has absolutely nothing to do with is the idea that nations that use Soviet/Russian made equipment have little regard for their soldiers lives. That is possibly the stupidest argument I've ever heard. Mass wave tactics are used to overwhelm an enemy, they are not used if a commander is going to throw his troops in a meat grinder. The idea is to win the fight, you can't do that if your men are all dead. No self respecting Soviet commander would have thrown his troops against a defense he did not think he could overcome. And then only if he could take and hold a position with his expected casualties would he attack. The Soviets were just as much tacticians as anyone else, they would have never just beat they fist against a wall until it came down.

People pile on top of BMPs and the like because those things are cramped, and not at all comfortable to ride in, plus when they get hit with a AT weapon or mine, the passengers inside often get vaporized from over pressure or shredded by shrapnel. If you ride on top of the vehicle you can at least jump off and go hide behind a rock rather than in the giant bullet magnet.

Now, I'm locking this as the useful feedback has been provided. Anything more I think will devolve into retardation, if anyone has any questions you can PM me.