PDA

View Full Version : LAV-25 vs BTR-60 0.917


Hunt3r
2010-04-22, 02:37
Playing on Muttrah City, =HOG='s 24/7 Muttrah server. I tend to run the APCs a lot, so I have pretty good experience with their relative power.

So the question, to me, is just begging to be asked. What happened to the balance of power between LAVs and BTRs? The LAV in PR now seems to be very weak compared to the BTR. The BTR can kill the LAV with one full load of ready rounds, but the LAV takes a great deal more then 40.

Three BTR-60s against two LAV-25s would mean the end of both LAVs. If the crew is good, they might nab 2 BTRs, injuring the third. A BRDM thrown into the mix would probably mean the BTRs would end up with less casualties.

I'm wondering if there's a change that tilted the balance of power over to the BTR side.

Moonlight
2010-04-22, 09:31
1BTR vs 1 LAV ends up in blown up BTR, 1 LAV vs 2 BTRs ends up in one destroyed BTR and destoyed LAV (usually).
People used to be whining that btrs are so weak etc and it hasn't changed much as the only thing that has changed was increasing the 14.5mm "clip" size for BTR-60 from 50 to 100.
Not to mention LAVs are not aimed espcially to fight enemy APCs, Cobra is.

I mean there could be created another thread with: "I use a lot of apcs on muttrah&jabal and my btrs are getting owned by a single LAV, why is so? US have Cobra on muttrah and 4 lavs on jabal! We should get more BMPs to fight those pesky lavs!" etc. ;]

Nehil
2010-04-22, 12:33
I would agree with Moonlight. In my opinion the LAV outclasses a BTR-60 in a standard lineup against eachother. Just yesterday I was playing on HOG 24/7 Muttrah and I was driving the BTR. I halt at a t-junction and this LAV runs straight passed us. We persuit. We hit the LAV in the arse with AP rounds, loads of em. It took the LAV about 5 seconds to figure out what was going on and return fire/run away.

Still, we had to fall back because we'd taken too much damage. The alarm was going off, so I drove back to main. That same LAV figures it out and chases us to our main. Nearly took us out.

But perhaps this is a problem with perspectives. I think the BTR is underpowered against the LAV because I usually sit in the BTR. You think the LAV is underpowered because you use the LAV more often than the BTR.

Tim270
2010-04-22, 13:16
Its fine as it is, you need 2x BTR's if you want to kill a LAV easily or get good with the BTR.

USMCMIDN
2010-04-22, 14:35
IRL the USMC LAV A2 has 14.5mm AP all around protection with an anti spall liner. If the battle is in the near future it would make sense that all the USMC LAV 25A1 have been upgraded to the A2 standard making it stop the 14.5mm AP rounds that the BTRs fire.

Now in the game there needs to be a balance so...Just dont solo the BTRs example Muttrah take all BTRs and that little dinky thing you will be fine.

Rudd
2010-04-22, 14:42
Its fine as it is, you need 2x BTR's if you want to kill a LAV easily or get good with the BTR.

I agree, though when I am in BTRs we do our best to make sure its 2 BTRs, 1 Rifleman AT engaging together, with a TOW nearby we can run to for protection if it goes sour.

the BTR works best with an infantry squad, the LAV is also better with an infantry squad, but because of HEAT it can be more self reliant.

Tim270
2010-04-22, 15:31
Yeah, the only real way to be effective at fighting LAV's with one BTR is try to 'snipe' them from far away before they can spot you and keep doing hit and run attacks in the attempt to track them before they can get back to the repair station.

Asymmetric balance is more fun.

Hunt3r
2010-04-22, 23:58
The LAV should get either have an increase in power or an increase in armor. Just enough to take 110 14.5mm before getting disabled/killed. The LAV-25 is very capable of fighting off BMP-2s, so I don't see why we shouldn't have the power of the autocannon properly modeled.

Eddie Baker
2010-04-23, 01:44
The increase in BTR-60s KPV ammo was a mistake that I do not know how occurred. That will be fixed, I assure you.

Hunt3r
2010-04-23, 02:36
Oh. If it's going to be fixed, this pretty much renders my ideas pointless. It's nice to know though.

Besides, do BTRs use 100 round belts or 50 round belts?

Eddie Baker
2010-04-23, 02:48
Oh. If it's going to be fixed, this pretty much renders my ideas pointless. It's nice to know though.

Besides, do BTRs use 100 round belts or 50 round belts?

They use 50 round belts in 10 boxes (1 ready, 9 stowed) in the KPV and 250 round round belts in 8 boxes (1 ready / 7 stowed). The KPV belts are packed with a pre-determined "party mix," as you found out earlier.

It was set at the correct ammo count before, I don't know how or why it got changed, but we caught the mistake on release a couple of weeks ago and it will be fixed.

Riflewizard
2010-04-23, 06:48
I use both occasoinally on muttrah

-BTR's are trash. only good for discouraging enemy helos, annoying enemy LAV's, and killing infantry out of cover.

-LAV's are amazing. Can kill any enemy unit with ease due to ammo choice. He destroys fobs defences and people (450 rounds of it too)
The AP annihilahtes enemy BTR's. They never stand much of a chance. I once saw a tracked LAV stuck behind the gas station. 2 btrs rolled in to attempt to finish it off. they both died rather quickly, to say the least.

I dont think a BTR has ever killed me while in a LAV. Only HAT and TOW's. The city enviroment makes it very difficult for the HAT types anyways due to low view distances and the high speed and firepower of the APC's if the crew is good.

ytman
2010-04-23, 18:00
You have to think of the larger picture here. That is Strategy.

Merely because MEC assets =/= US assets does not mean either one is trash. They just fulfill different roles.

BTRs are 3x on Muttrah with LAVs being only 2x. Combine to this that LAVs spawn at a Carrier and have 2-3 minutes before they hit ground (and being at docks is semi vulnerable) while BTRs spawn at main and can take routes that offer protection (buildings).

If you are MEC and you know of LAVs inbound to your BTRs you DO NOT rush them with your BTRs. You lure them with your BTRs and take them out with infantry AT.

If you are US your job is to assist and transport the troops and protect them from the BTRs.

People have a tendency to think that:

Team X is given an APC and Team Y is given an APC its obvious that they must duel with each other all alone!

This is simply not true.

Hunt3r
2010-04-24, 19:18
The problem is that your strategy is invalidated in 0.917 because the LAV-25 simply has problems taking on one BTR firing on it, nevermind two.

25mm should blow right through piddly-ass BTRs. :\

Eriand
2010-04-27, 18:26
I must admit, it feels as if either the BTRs got buffed, or the LAVs got nerfed.

Played Jabal today. Fully repaied LAV, got tracked, lost turret control in the time it took me to put about 48 rounds into him (AP). Worst thing is, he'd been shot by a LAT just before we got there.

Oh, and he didn't die, he circled us and shot us to death.

Another time 2 BTRs killed us by theirselves in about 2-3 seconds. Shooting at our front.

SANGUE-RUIM
2010-04-28, 12:55
I must admit, it feels as if either the BTRs got buffed, or the LAVs got nerfed.

Played Jabal today. Fully repaied LAV, got tracked, lost turret control in the time it took me to put about 48 rounds into him (AP). Worst thing is, he'd been shot by a LAT just before we got there.

Oh, and he didn't die, he circled us and shot us to death.

Another time 2 BTRs killed us by theirselves in about 2-3 seconds. Shooting at our front.

yeah i feel the same... lavs sux now

Dylan.swe
2010-06-04, 17:50
Tactics for BTR's has just changed, just like in older versions the BTR suck if used wrong, but the opposite if used right!
LAV now has speed, but is easily tracked if hit in the right spot! As mentioned here u should attack/annoy LAV from a distance hopin for him to chase u...if he does make sure not to waste ammo where it doesnt count!
1on1 battles are mostly in LAV favour cause wrong tactics is used!
And remember that HAT kills the LAV aswell as the BTR in a split second!
The LAT disables both the BTR and LAV for further battle, if u know that LAV is hit by LAT and still not tracked.....just find it and shoot anywhere for 2 secs.....b-o-o-m

Some guy mentioned a tracked LAV takin on 2 btrs.........dream on......at least i couldve killed the LAV by "shooting the tip of the 25-mm barrel to kill it"!!!!!
And how hard is it to move your btr in position where the tracked LAV cant even fire back?......LOOK where his barrel is pointing......3 outta 4 sides around the LAV is absolutely safe to stand at even for INFANTRY (the gunner in the LAV will surely (Shirley?) scream in VOIP that "-I cant aim down on this side.....moooooooove!!!!"
Just because u once met a bunch of drunk russians using BTRs doesnt mean that the vehicle itself is bad!
Just write about it in the "tales from battlefield"-section
BTRs works fine - humans sometimes FAIL (as "we" say in this game)
//Dylan

manligheten
2010-06-05, 01:07
Just enough to take 110 14.5mm before getting disabled/killed.
110??? Why not nuke it?
It's silly how much hits the APC can take. Either it takes damage or it doesn't. 7 - 8 rounds should be enough to take a APC out. Especially with the heavier calibres. 3 - 5 hits would be enough. To have the APC circle around eachother shooting whole cassettes of armor piercing ammo at eachother is...silly.

Rudd
2010-06-05, 01:12
The problem is that your strategy is invalidated in 0.917 because the LAV-25 simply has problems taking on one BTR firing on it, nevermind two.

25mm should blow right through piddly-ass BTRs. :\

yeah cuz that would make great gameplay

we could rename the mod to "Project Reality - US military pwns all you weakling countries"

Tim270
2010-06-05, 01:32
The problem is that your strategy is invalidated in 0.917 because the LAV-25 simply has problems taking on one BTR firing on it, nevermind two.

25mm should blow right through piddly-ass BTRs. :\

If youre LAV is getting killed by one BTR, either you suck or you have been sitting with your rear to the BTR most of the contact....

LAV vs BTR60, LAV will win with a competent crew...

dtacs
2010-06-05, 02:44
Rudd;1359058']yeah cuz that would make great gameplay

we could rename the mod to "Project Reality - US military pwns all you weakling countries"
No, its realistic. The BTR's should always hunt in packs, but in the current situation the 25mm not being able to properly penetrate 7mm of side armor on the BTR is stupid.

I've been in a BTR a number of times and laughed when I've ran away from a LAV with my ass showing to him and not dying.

Rudd
2010-06-05, 02:48
No, its realistic. The BTR's should always hunt in packs, but in the current situation the 25mm not being able to properly penetrate 7mm of side armor on the BTR is stupid.

25mm should blow right through piddly-ass BTRs. :\

you comment is more considered, specifying that you think that certain armour sectors should be weakened, whereas his was just...uninspiring.

imo, almost every single vehicle ingame needs to have more critical components than now, and stronger regions than now, but that kind of stuff is above my pay grade :P I've learned much...but thats not something I have a clue about.

Hunt3r
2010-06-05, 03:09
The real problem is that we doing it wrong. The BTR is not supposed to engage armor unless absolutely necessary. The only logical decision that would make sense for gameplay is to have it try to avoid armor contact if possible, and instead have it be used as a troop transport, and instead leave the job of engaging armor up to the BMP as it should be, or to AT assets.

dtacs
2010-06-05, 03:24
Adding to that, heres the BTR-60s armor thicknesses from Wikipedia (Which in this case is a valid source, who would really edit it?)

Welded steel[/URL]
7 mm at 86° hull upper front (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BTR-60#cite_note-Pancerni_1-1)
9 mm at 47° hull lower front (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BTR-60#cite_note-Gary.27s_Combat_Vehicle_Reference_Guide-5)
7 mm hull sides (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BTR-60#cite_note-Gary.27s_Combat_Vehicle_Reference_Guide-5)
5 mm hull upper rear
7 mm hull lower rear (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BTR-60#cite_note-Gary.27s_Combat_Vehicle_Reference_Guide-5)
5 mm hull floor
7 mm hull roof (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BTR-60#cite_note-Gary.27s_Combat_Vehicle_Reference_Guide-5)
10 mm turret front
7 mm turret sides (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BTR-60#cite_note-FAS-6)
7 mm turret sear[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BTR-60#cite_note-Gary.27s_Combat_Vehicle_Reference_Guide-5"]
7 mm turret roof
I'm pretty sure an armor piercing 25mm round could penetrate 1cm of steel with ease. To be honest, the MEC should ride on the outside of the BTR, riding on the inside is a very bad idea as demonstrated by the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.

Just look at the way they get out, its simply an impractical vehicle (0:45)

J_LtWGclB4Q&feature=related

Eddie Baker
2010-06-05, 04:04
All those stats are cut and paste from Jane's Armour and Artillery, so that is a reliable source.

Hunt3r
2010-06-05, 05:48
The real problem is that we doing it wrong. The BTR is not supposed to engage armor unless absolutely necessary. The only logical decision that would make sense for gameplay is to have it try to avoid armor contact if possible, and instead have it be used as a troop transport, and instead leave the job of engaging armor up to the BMP as it should be, or to AT assets.

The Russians clearly never intended the BTR to be anything more then a Stryker, so why is it engaging armor with the equivalent of an HMG?

Bah, double tap.

The BMP's autocannon can eat LAVs for breakfast, however, and the only counter for it on Jabal would be ATGMs and AT rockets, and possibly CAS. In fact, in APC/IFV vs IFV/APC, you might as well make them tracked as soon as a burst of 3 APFSDS-Ts hit the rear. The simple reality is that these vehicles are not designed to take rounds, short of strapping on enough armor to make them only transportable by C-17 or C-5, and only in tactical airlift, which would never happen in the USAF.

BobTheSilensious
2010-06-20, 19:42
Sorry to revive this 15 day old thread (ok not that old), but I got something interesting.

Here, I made a table to show the actual damages cause by a LAV and a BTR in PR. I made this to clear a bit the difference between BTR-60 and LAV-25 and how they can withstand each others.

I rounded most of the values, so it doesn't take exactly the same amount of bullets and times to take out an APC, most because of the "critical state" that eat up Hitpoints each seconds when the APC lose 90% of his HP...

-----------------------------
25mm HEI vs BTR-60
-----------------------------
Rate of fire : 200 rpm
Body | Dam. 3%/shot | Will kill with 34 shots within 10 sec.
Glass parts | Dam 10%/shot | Will kill with 10 shots within 3 sec.
Thin metal plate | Dam 10%/shot | Will kill with 10 shots within 3 sec.
Wood parts | Dam 10%/shot | Will kill with 10 shots within 3 sec.
Tires | Dam 7.5%/shot | Will kill with 14 shots within 4 sec.
----------------------------
25mm AP vs BTR-60
----------------------------
Rate of fire : 200 rpm
Body | Dam. 2.17%/shot | Will kill with 47 shots within 14 sec.
Glass parts | Dam 10.8%/shot | Will kill with 10 shots within 3 sec.
Thin metal plate | Dam 10.8%/shot | Will kill with 10 shots within 3 sec.
Wood parts | Dam 10.8%/shot | Will kill with 10 shots within 3 sec.
Tires | Dam 8.13%/shot | Will kill with 13 shots within 4 sec.
----------------------------
14.5mm vs LAV-25
----------------------------
Rate of fire : 550 rpm
Body | Dam. 1.72%/shot | Will kill with 59 shots within 7 sec.
Glass parts | Useless (no damages at all)
Thin metal plate | Useless
Tires | Useless

I don't think the KPVT users need to be nerfed, just maybe lesser the effect of 14.5mm against LAV for balance sake. Other then that, the fire rate of both should stay at it is, so we still keep some asymmetry to make things better.

Source: Of course, me

-Bob

Trooper909
2010-06-21, 02:27
Rudd;1359058']
we could rename the mod to "Project Reality - US military pwns all you weakling countries"



Thought that was what I was playing :mrgreen:

Really tho no apc should engage any armor even if its LAV vs BTR with the LAV being far better but still does not mean the LAV should be a BTR hunter.

I know its been said 1000 times but and apc's job is to ferry troops around and give a little fire support if needed vs other infantry (the glamer huh? ).

Apc's should function more like how a trans chopper does right now IE if needed it will be called by infantry with intell of the area like no AT near no other armor etc not how peaple drive them right now.

dtacs
2010-06-21, 02:50
HEI rounds kill a BTR-60 better than AP rounds?

Something is seriously wrong here, definitely needs to be looked at.

TH3_BL4CK
2010-06-22, 10:07
Next time shoot the wheels, does more damage ;)

BigNate
2010-06-23, 04:50
Thought that was what I was playing :mrgreen:

Really tho no apc should engage any armor even if its LAV vs BTR with the LAV being far better but still does not mean the LAV should be a BTR hunter.

I know its been said 1000 times but and apc's job is to ferry troops around and give a little fire support if needed vs other infantry (the glamer huh? ).

Apc's should function more like how a trans chopper does right now IE if needed it will be called by infantry with intell of the area like no AT near no other armor etc not how peaple drive them right now.

If the entire PR playerbase had this attitude, we would not have this thread.

Quite often the LAVs will end up filling a hunter/killer role when a server is only around 30-40 players, making highspeed passes through hostile territory. The US need only win the first "fair" fight vs. enemy AT and BTRs, and if they do the MEC heavy assets become fish in a proverbial barrel as they respawn. On full servers, this still happens, but less often. More infantry results in more AT/AA, and it becomes much harder to decisively win that first fair fight LAVs intact.

The reality of it is that the LAV weapon systems are very capable, and skilled crews can easily take a tactically advantageous situation and turn it into utter domination. In these situations, very few players will take the high road and play LAV the way you suggest: as infantry transport and support. Why would you, when putting your boot on the neck of your opponent is within your means?

Teh0
2010-07-17, 18:36
APC is not meant to fight other APC's. Use AT for it and see that btr can be destroyed by on LAT shot, but you need 2 to kill LAV. Also remember that 25 HE is very effective against infantry.

Murphy
2010-08-14, 20:02
I don't think I've ever had an infantry squad tell me my cover fire is not appreciated. Sure some people seem to cling to the idea that an APC should sit idle in main waiting for someone to need trans, but majority of the time we have air trans setup. Why would you want a mobile gun platform to sit idle when infantry are being slaughtered by an enemy APC/IFV? The BTR/LAV have something many people seem to forget, intimidation factor. I know if my squad is holed up inside building with no AT (thankfully other players took them before we had a chance, which tend to be the case when you need it most) and an APC rolls up infront of us and there is a friendly APC idle in main doing nothing I'd be rather angry at them. There are soo many modes of transport APCs are usually a last resort, so relegating them to strictly transport roles is misuse of the asset.

BTR vs LAV is a fairly decent matchup if you understand their strengths and weaknesses, I think a lot of people are just playing favorites. Sure the armor/hit boxes are somewhat unrealistic, but there are always a lot of compromises for the sake of balance, and enjoyment.

I did find that dmg break down very interesting though. So what you mean to say is that a BTR sustains the same dmg regardless of where they take hits, where as the LAV has weaker points in the armor?

Murphy
2010-08-14, 20:42
Yes, that is a very good point. If you bring the air superiority into the scenario an LAV would only have to worry about AT personnel/emplacements, but now we are reliant on a CAS squad that may or may not be relevant the next time the BTRs respawn. The Cobra has as many countermeasures as the APCs do, and if they are being effective more people will start to focus on bringing him down because if US CAS is dominating MEC forces can't really do anything but play defensive and wait for someone to take him out.

Scheble
2010-08-15, 04:55
With alot of exp. being a Cobra gunner the main thing we do is take out BTRs one after the other and the MEC team is at a standstill and our inf. AND lavs start to move up and win and the LAV's stood a good chance and actually did very well that round.

Wo0Do0
2010-09-07, 04:26
Its fine as it is, you need 2x BTR's if you want to kill a LAV easily or get good with the BTR.

lol Tim, as if u are :P

ralfidude
2010-09-07, 06:10
Its just tactics. Learn your tactics well, and NEVER split up. Power in numbers.