Page 1 of 1
Return ATGMs to APCs, sort of
Posted: 2007-10-16 23:01
by BetterDeadThanRed
As the title says, I think it may be a good idea to reintroduce ATGM armed APCs on a limited scale on certain maps to help remove some of the mirror balancing that seems all to persistent between the organized armies of this mod.
On maps like Gulf of Oman Qwai river where APCs are facing off against armor, a small number of TOW armed LAV-25s would help give the APCs a fighting chance against the armor without overpowering either of them. A single shot would not take down a tank, but it would damage it enough to get the crew running for their lives and with a long enough reload time for the missiles, would help promote teamwork for effective ambushing.
Adding a third weapons screen to the gunner position with a 30 second + arm time for the TOW without any other changes to the layout of the APC would keep the spammyness down and give the tankers an inherent advantage.
For those of you that haven't noticed, unlike the other APCs, the Chinese APC still has the HJ-8 attached. If I may add, I can't see the Chinese getting these kind of APCs without the HJ-8 model first being removed for identification purposes.
As for the British, asymmetrically balance for the win baby. TOW mounted land rovers? FV-102 Strikers? Perhaps this is pushing it, but just a suggestion.
Posted: 2007-10-17 00:24
by Rhino
When the APCs had AT missiles on them they where just used as light tanks, not what we want in PR....
Thou its a nice idea about having 2 separate configs, may keep that in mind.
Posted: 2007-10-17 01:39
by Eddie Baker
A third weapon slot would probably be how we would implement it.
The thing to remember about ATGM equipped IFVs is that often the launcher does not have the same maximum elevation/depression as the cannon and coaxial MG. I believe that by tying ATGMs to a different weapon slot we might be able to reflect that in the game. On the BTR-90/BMP-2 the ATGM launcher can actually traverse independently of the main turret; don't know if that can be done with a third weapon slot, though, it may have to be tied to another crew position.
The main reason they were removed, though, is because of the APCs/IFVs in the game, only the BTR-90 has an ATGM launcher equipped in real life. LAV-25 in USMC service is not equipped with ATGM, nor is the Warrior in British Army service (though a Milan could be fitted and fired by the commander from an open hatch). The ZSL92A does not have an ATGM and Cannon equipped turret available.
FV102s are no longer in service, but Milan ATGMs are still mounted on Land Rovers.
Posted: 2007-10-17 02:23
by BetterDeadThanRed
Valid points.
My thinking behind the use of the TOW is that if it was to be put on a 3rd weapon slot, it would have to require a crewman kit to be used otherwise happy-go-luckies will just jump in and start firing them off into hostile sand and even so, I couldn't imagine 3 people fully crewing an APC normally. With that said, I would be willing to accept minor realism issues to help discourage rambo crewmen.
I do know for a fact that EA didn't pull the TOW launcher for the LAV-25 out of their ***, I just don't know for certain if the USMC actually uses the thing.
Its a shame that they don't use FV102s anymore though.
Posted: 2007-10-17 02:27
by Eddie Baker
BetterDeadThanRed wrote:My thinking behind the use of the TOW is that if it was to be put on a 3rd weapon slot, it would have to require a crewman kit to be used otherwise happy-go-luckies will just jump in and start firing them off into hostile sand and even so, I couldn't imagine 3 people fully crewing an APC normally.
Well, by "weapon slot" I didn't mean another crew position; I mean one of the numeral buttons you press to select missiles or bombs on the aircraft, or different round types in the AFVs.
Even in the case of the BTR-90, I don't think we'd sacrifice the infantry position to add a new crew position just to operate the Spandrel. If it came down to us wanting to implement an independent traverse for the launcher, I think we'd just tie it to the driver/commander position and make that POV from the ATGM sight.
BetterDeadThanRed wrote:I do know for a fact that EA didn't pull the TOW launcher for the LAV-25 out of their ***, I just don't know for certain if the USMC actually uses the thing.
Nope, it as actually one of the things they didn't pull out of their ***. That turret is in use on the Saudi and Kuwaiti LAVs, but not the USMC's, and they won't have a replacement or probably even a major upgrade for the LAV until 2020, because of the development costs for the EFV.
[Edit]Another fun thing to note is that the Desert Warrior export version of the Warrior ICV has the "heavy" version of that same turret, and is also in use by Kuwait and other MidEast customers. The current turret in the British Army Warrior is not even stabilized, and the Rarden cannon, though it is VERY powerful (in the same league as the rounds fired from the GAU-8 Avenger and 30mm Russian aircraft and AFV cannons), is fed from ammunition clips manually loaded by the vehicle commander.
Posted: 2007-10-17 11:58
by Harrod200
'[R-DEV wrote:Eddie Baker;509918']Well, by "weapon slot" I didn't mean another crew position; I mean one of the numeral buttons you press to select missiles or bombs on the aircraft, or different round types in the AFVs.
Even in the case of the BTR-90, I don't think we'd sacrifice the infantry position to add a new crew position just to operate the Spandrel. If it came down to us wanting to implement an independent traverse for the launcher, I think we'd just tie it to the driver/commander position and make that POV from the ATGM sight.
Nope, it as actually one of the things they didn't pull out of their ***. That turret is in use on the Saudi and Kuwaiti LAVs, but not the USMC's, and they won't have a replacement or probably even a major upgrade for the LAV until 2020, because of the development costs for the EFV.
[Edit]Another fun thing to note is that the Desert Warrior export version of the Warrior ICV has the "heavy" version of that same turret, and is also in use by Kuwait and other MidEast customers. The current turret in the British Army Warrior is not even stabilized, and the Rarden cannon, though it is VERY powerful (in the same league as the rounds fired from the GAU-8 Avenger and 30mm Russian aircraft and AFV cannons), is fed from ammunition clips manually loaded by the vehicle commander.
The Warrior really is a good vehicle with comedy weapons.
Arrsepedia wrote:To compensate for its speed, presence and protection it is equiped with comedy weapons that need precognitive abilities (Think I'll need HE in three rounds time) or (when using the Chaingun), a patient and slow moving enemy, "firing now", BANG, clunk, "stoppage, feck hang on a bit - bollocks dropped the spinny thing"
Arrsepedia wrote:30mm Gun which is fitted to the Warrior. Is a pain in the arrse to operate due to the first round (6 can be loaded in one go) having to be handcranked into the breach.
They come in clips of three and are loaded three clips at a time. The Rarden Cannon must have a another clip loaded after three rounds in order for the mechanism to keep the cycle of self loading going. If the Commander loses count the gun will not load and this will cause what is know as a gap in feed and the gun will need to be made safe, (an unload followed by a load) This is a war time situation could cost the crew its life and that is why an engagement is usually three rounds. Tip from the top! Carry some lose rounds to reload that one round engagement when you used a HE round on some random bloke with an RPG!! Red mist!!
Any way to incorporate that into the game? Please DON'T if there is
Posted: 2007-10-17 13:17
by Alex6714
About the positions, why not do it heli gunner style? Right click for the TOW.
Posted: 2007-10-17 14:18
by Waaah_Wah
Coz right click is the coax perhaps...?
Posted: 2007-10-17 16:03
by Alex6714
Waaah_Wah wrote:Coz right click is the coax perhaps...?
I is teh stupid.
Well, make it like another type of "ammunition" then, with a reasonable long arm time.
Posted: 2007-10-17 21:13
by robbo
Warrior can be fitted with ATGMs
The Kuwaiti version has them
2 TOW missiles.
Posted: 2007-10-17 21:41
by AnRK
How do those TOW launchers load themselves by the way? Or are they single shot things that you have to load from outside (though I'd guess that'd be fairly useless). Either way there wouldn't be a delay before being able to fire them would there? Otherwise they wouldn't serve the whole self defence role very well.
Posted: 2007-10-17 22:08
by BetterDeadThanRed
AnRK wrote:How do those TOW launchers load themselves by the way? Or are they single shot things that you have to load from outside (though I'd guess that'd be fairly useless). Either way there wouldn't be a delay before being able to fire them would there? Otherwise they wouldn't serve the whole self defence role very well.
Crew has to dismount, its not an easy procedure from what I know, at least not something you should plan on doing in a firefight.
Posted: 2007-10-17 22:16
by Outlawz7
So implement ATGM as a one-shot weapon, which could be reloaded from a supply truck/or supply drop?
Posted: 2007-10-17 22:29
by G.Drew
^ sounds ok i suppose to just have it as a 1-shot weapon
Posted: 2007-10-18 03:01
by Eddie Baker
robbo wrote:Warrior can be fitted with ATGMs
The Kuwaiti version has them
Already said that. But that is a completely different turret than is on the British Army Warrior, which may not see an upgraded turret for years.
Since this thread is becoming repetitive, I am locking.