Add the Bradley with the Anti tank Rockets

Oberstafuhrer · Post by **Oberstafuhrer** » 2007-04-02 23:28

it would be cool if you modded the bradley with anti tank rockets.

possibly laser guided?

Post by **Bob_Marley** » 2007-04-02 23:31

That would require a total remodel of the Bradley. And when I say remodel, I mean starting from scratch, as the team arnt allowed to modify EA's models.

Also, IFVs will not be carrying anti tank missiles in PR.

In short: No.

Aus Sniper01 · Post by **Aus Sniper01** » 2007-04-02 23:32

Hands Aussies personal 9mm with 1 bullet in the clip for you.....

oh oh! but wait theres more! USMC dont use Bradleys!

Oberstafuhrer · Post by **Oberstafuhrer** » 2007-04-02 23:33

it would still be cool, i mean that model of the bradley is every where in iraq right now. they should definetly look into it

Aus Sniper01 · Post by **Aus Sniper01** » 2007-04-02 23:35

Hello, USMC is the main force in BF 2 atm and ahhhh they dont use the Bradley.

Oberstafuhrer · Post by **Oberstafuhrer** » 2007-04-02 23:36

then why do they have the linebacker

Post by **Bob_Marley** » 2007-04-02 23:37

Aus Sniper01 wrote:Hands Aussies personal 9mm with 1 bullet in the clip for you.....

oh oh! but wait theres more! USMC dont use Bradleys!

You're going to give him a pistol with a clip and no magazine? What good will that do?

Anyway, I've no doubt that a normal M2Awhateverthehellthey'reonnow Bradley IFV will be appearing for the US army when they arrive. And that the linebacker will be phased out from the USMC.

Oberstafuhrer wrote:then why do they have the linebacker

because Dice are lazy, inaccurate gits.

Aus Sniper01 · Post by **Aus Sniper01** » 2007-04-02 23:50

because its Dice mate, Dice put anything and everything it even if its not do with the actual faction.

Post by **77SiCaRiO77** » 2007-04-02 23:56

Bob_Marley wrote:
Also, IFVs will not be carrying anti tank missiles in PR.

.

can any body tell me WHY ? they use rokects in RL :/ , this is project reality after all

Post by **Bob_Marley** » 2007-04-03 00:00

Because they were being used for tank hunting instead of infantry support. And they were better tank killers than tanks in some of the more recent versions of PR.

PlayPR! · Post by **PlayPR!** » 2007-04-03 00:01

Bob_Marley wrote:That would require a total remodel of the Bradley. And when I say remodel, I mean starting from scratch, as the team arnt allowed to modify EA's models.

Also, IFVs will not be carrying anti tank missiles in PR.

In short: No.

I dont care if its added or not, the last thing we need is another US toy..., but could the Devs do what they did with the LAAV and BRDM as well? Just edit off the Missile launchers? Just throwing out ideas here.

Post by **77SiCaRiO77** » 2007-04-03 00:05

Bob_Marley wrote:Because they were being used for tank hunting instead of infantry support. And they were better tank killers than tanks in some of the more recent versions of PR.

if the devs make all real i dont see how they will be used like that 1.-one shell on a tank its sufecent to blow a bradley 2.- the reload time of those missils is very long 3.- they only carri two .

example : bradley pointing at an t90 , t90 alarm , t 90 launch the shtora system , the missil will go very away from the target , the t90 move the turret and kill the bradley with one shoot .

Post by **Bob_Marley** » 2007-04-03 00:53

77SiCaRiO77 wrote:if the devs make all real i dont see how they will be used like that 1.-one shell on a tank its sufecent to blow a bradley 2.- the reload time of those missils is very long 3.- they only carri two .

example : bradley pointing at an t90 , t90 alarm , t 90 launch the shtora system , the missil will go very away from the target , the t90 move the turret and kill the bradley with one shoot .

The thing is, it didnt work like that. The APCs are faster than the tanks, more accurate with thier primary AT weapon, there are currently no AM systems on any of the PR tanks and the fact that the APCs would frequently survive a hit from a tank.

And while they "only" carry two, they can be rearmed, and back in the day I've seen skilled crews blowing away tanks left, right and centre with APCs.

Eddie Baker · Post by **Eddie Baker** » 2007-04-03 01:15

This has been suggested before. Please do a search next time.

*sigh* Once again, folks, The faction in PR is "US Military." If it were only the Marines, many if not most of the vehicles, including ones from vBF2, would not be in there.

And We have repeatedly stated that we are working on differentiating on a map by map basis between US Army/Air Force and US Marines/Navy "blue and green teams," and have permission to use a 3rd party skin of the ACU.

IFVs will eventually have ATGMs again in PR. They were removed because 2 of the 3 APCs in Battlefield 2 do not have them in real life (LAV-25 of USMC does not have the same turret as the Saudi and Kuwaiti versions), the third APC (BTR-90) does not even exist in sufficient quantities for the Russians to even equip an entire unit with them, and because the fourth APC we will be including also does not have them.

Long story short, until we have more APCs or IFVs that actually have ATGMs and maps with slightly more symmetrical equipment placed on them, they are not going to have ATGMs.

And because this has been discussed before, I am locking this thread.