FV 510 Warrior

[Mr_blox]

The Warrior IFV is almost completely useless in the last few updates, there are multiple problems with it.

1st The 30mm Cannon sucks against even the lightest APC's, Last night I played 2 rounds in the Warrior (Burning Sands and Shija), In Burning Sands we got the Jump on a BMP-3 hitting him 9-10 times before he even had an idea where we were, the BMP-3 subsequently found us, switched to AP and blew us up in about 2 seconds, After waiting for another Warrior we ambushed a BMP-2, I got 5-6 hits on side armour and then he just ATGM'd us. 2 rounds later its Shija Valley and im in the Warrior again, Both warriors are driving to Shija south when the lead Warrior gets hit by the Chinese wheeled APC, I spot and engage him hitting him between 10-11 times but he manages to run away only smoking after destroying the lead APC, Later on we are attacking infantry in a Barn west of Shija South and we hear the Chinese APC behind us, I fire 6 shots into his gun (the only part of him i can see) then he spots us and wrecks us in around 2-3 seconds, In this engagement I also found another problem, when the Warrior gets hit anywhere but frontal Armour by an Auto-Cannon it rocks around making it impossible to hit anything.

2nd Splash damage on the 30mm HE rounds is non existent, on both rounds i had to get direct hits on infantry to kill them, In 1 case even withstanding a direct hit (was seen by my driver DanTheMan)

3rd problem is the lack of acceleration (the rough 3 seconds you have to wait after pressing forwards for the vehicle to even move), this was ok in previous versions of PR but it has been made worse by the warriors lack of effectiveness against Armour because now you can neither run away or fight

In conclusion the Warrior desperately needs some kind of buff whether that be to armour, gun damage, gun ROF so it can stand a chance of going toe to toe against enemy APC's. I know the ROF is there due to realism but hell in RL the Warrior would have a guy with a Javelin inside to blow the hell out of anything the Warrior couldn't take on itself

[K4on]

Cheers for your feedback.

Let me reply:
Sounds and driving physics are OK (originally recorded on an military base of real warrior apcs).
Armor is OK in terms of PRs armor classes. Gun Rate of Fire is realisitc, like all other PR vehicles have realistic fire rates.
The fire rate 0.9 to 1.0 debuff was just a result of having wrong information before, that is why we set the ROF to the real life counterpart.

So for PR, you simply don't engage the BMP-3 IFV with and Warrior. Therefore the mappers should give you other assets to counter the balance problems. Like, taking out an BMP-3 by Challenger2 Tanks

Regarding the HE projectiles, the splash is unlike your report exisitng and has same ammount of damage and splash as on other 30mm HE projectiles in the game.

If you want to provide map feedback, like unbalanced layers -> visit the map feedback section.

[Rhino]

I'm fully aware the British Warriors don't have any atgm's irl but if Britain was (for some unknown reason) to go to war with China or Russia and the Warrior was found to be useless against their armor surely someone would issue an urgent operational requirement to get the required upgrade to counter the threat.
But that's quite a lot of work so maybe as k4on said maybe some map balancing is needed as its getting very one sided on some maps in terms of apc's.

Not really....

The British ideology is that its better to have a guy sitting in the back with a Javelin who can either fire out of the top or get out and silently move up to the target to engage it than to mount them on the big noisy vehicle that has to expose itself to engage, which will most likley result in it getting blown to bits..

As such if Britain did go into a full scale war, it would deploy lots of Javelins and other AT weapons and have the Warriors just transport the infantry up to the fight and engage any soft targets it can help with.

[camo]

Fair point, but you can't deny something needs to be done in order to provide just a little bit of balance. Maybe increase the number of HAT kits available to the British team to simulate the increase of Javelins that you talk about, or maybe just remove a warrior and add another challenger instead. I almost think you should leave Warriors out of AAS altogether and just have them for INS layers.

[Rhino]

Yes those, other than removing them from AAS layers are things we are looking at. At the end of the day there is nothing wrong with the vehicle itself, its simply a APC (although its technically classed as an IFV in r/l but that's still just a type of APC) and as such its main role is a taxi.

[40mmrain]

yes, K4on is right, the Warrior is weak as hell in PR, but this shouldnt change. The asset layers need to change on a handful of maps to reflect the weakness of the Warrior now. That or give the brits more HAT kits than the enemy.

[Spush]

We based a game on reality? You know what happens in reality, asymmetrical battles, don't think the enemy balances out their military hardware with the others so they can have a fair battle . It would be saying, oh the insurgents lose because they don't have something to counter the Bradly on karbala.

[ElshanF]

40mm has a point. People are saying in reality a warrior would have a javelin inside it... But in PR we don't even have a Javelin..

[Rhino]

40mm has a point. People are saying in reality a warrior would have a javelin inside it... But in PR we don't even have a Javelin..

No but the NLAW isn't that different from the Jav other than its missing its party top down attack trick which gameplay wise, wouldn't make a hell of a lot of difference.

[Prevtzer]

We based a game on reality? You know what happens in reality, asymmetrical battles, don't think the enemy balances out their military hardware with the others so they can have a fair battle . It would be saying, oh the insurgents lose because they don't have something to counter the Bradly on karbala.

What you need to realize is that people play PR because it's a great mix of realism and fun. Making changes just for the sake of realism usually isn't good for the gameplay/ fun aspect of it.

[Spush]

Which is funny because I do realize that, I have been saying this for years to people. Usually making changes that favors realism is good, same with arcade gameplay aspects. But something that is real, where a warrior is hardly if ever fielded with atgms to counter is something where we go realism over gameplay. Look at all of our vehicles and weapon systems, all of them feature realistic aspects (minus the fire control systems)...

[ElshanF]

I agree with the extra HAT addition to brits to compensate for the "OP" armor they face however to be really fair the extra HAT should stay next to the warrior.. which probably won't happen.

[Rudd]

Sometimes the answer is that you aren't supposed to kill it yourself; you're supposed to get help or retreat.

The warrior is no where near as powerful as it has been in the past, but it's still a force multiplier for infantry.

This is why I'm such a fan of using warriors inside my infantry squad rather than seeing warriors sitting by themselves somewhere, Their presence keeps my ammo high, and kits avaliable. The thermal vision is instrumental in identifying threats. The warrior protects my infantry from snipers, other infantry and light vehicles and my infantry protect it from enemy AT and if I have a LAT/HAT then I also protect it from enemy heavier armour.

Throw another friendly tank into the mix from another squad...suddenly you're starting to see complementary combined arms.

It's not easy, its quite unforgiving in fact, but its teamwork. Vehicles don't just need to teamwork with eachother, they need to teamwork with infantry instead of being insular and therefore vulnerable. The number of times I've needed a HEAT shell on the mineret in burning sands...

the BMP is a beast, but the Brits get the extra tank because of that on Burning Sands. Warriors are infantry support vehicles, not tanks.

If there is going to be a balance redress, it'll be with the warrior's support capabilities imo not with its ROF/power/hitpoints (unless someone models a the newer versions)

[ElshanF]

@rudd The funny thing is the warrior is the most used APC in terms of mechanized I've seen in PR. Of you see mech Inf with btr & bmps etc but they always wonder off somewhere else but because the warrior is the weakes.. it always stays with the inf (from what I've seen)

[X-Alt]

Honestly, the Warrior needs an improvement. Yesterday, me and a friend in the APC Squad on Shija Valley picked up some INF and dropped them at Rice Paddies, one MG and some INF took them all down. We were engaging a particularly dangerous looking HAT, which we fired at for about 500 years with HE and Coax until he dropped dead. Suddenly, we are hit with a LAT, not tracked and still operable, we position the front armor only to see a Rifleman, again taking an eternity to kill him before attempting an RTB. The RTB did not go well, the same LAT resupplied from the rifleman (which should have been an easy kill should it not have been the sluggish auto cannon) and struck us in the front armor and boom DEAD. If we were in a WZ551, the infantry would have been in 9001 pieces.. We soon used a much more practical, agile Panther and destroyed the same guys, raking up 42 infantry kills plus scaring off their CAS chopper on multiple occasions.. It really does need a maneuverability boost, it is an Infantry Fighting Vehicle after all, not a super expensive coffin..

In the anti-armor role, it is equally disappointing. On Burning Sands, we had a perfect angle on a BMP-3 with tons of distance and with the BMP looking the other way, we popped it with AP rounds for a LONG TIME, only to have it turn and fire an ATGM in our front armor and BEEP BEEP BEEP BEEP BOOM! IMHO, the NLAW should become lock-on (pretty sure a guy is working on that IIRC) and the Warrior could receive a top seat operable by anyone, so a LAT or especially, a HAT can turn it into a BMP hunter if they choose to co-operate, making the APC or MECHINF squad even more deadly.

/mytwocents

[Steeps]

The day British armor models are fixed in PR so they don't bounce would be great.

[camo]

Sorry to bring back an old thread but is there anything we can do?
Could you maybe buff the accuracy of the warrior's cannon?

"Proven accuracy is such that 1 m groups at a range of 1,000 m are achieved on a regular basis."
source Army Guide - L21A1 Rarden, Gun
Barrel length is also longer than other cannons in game, 2440mm compared to the 1914mm length of the 2a42 cannon that is on the bmp-2.

I had a game on burning sands a few days ago and my gunner was first cussing at the lack of fire rate, and then when we moved up to support the infantry he was struggling to even get shots inside a window from only a hundred metres away due the deviation of the cannon. It may be only a small buff but it could make up a little bit for this vehicles obvious inadequacies in every other department.

[Mats391]

I think it would only be fair to give the warrior and scimitar better accuracy. Will do that

[camo]

Sweet that's good news.

[ElshanF]

Coming back to this, the Warrior a lot or even everyone I know thinks it's terrible now.