gunnersman Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 I couldnt find this one anywhere. How about infantry being aloud to shoot from vehicles? AT infantry as well? I would like to see that in the game. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zalgiris 1410 Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 Would definately be good in the sense of being assumedly realistic but should only happen in an emergency such as in an ambush or other tight close fighting at a reduced level of effect because it is from a vehicle and not every member could fire every time. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted September 1, 2005 Share Posted September 1, 2005 In an RSA I used to frequent they had a sign on the wall: No swearing aloudQuite clever really ... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted September 1, 2005 Share Posted September 1, 2005 Firing from within/ontop of a vehicle, under realistic circumstances, is on our list. We don't know how difficult it will be to acheive, but we're going to try to have it for the first release. No, I don't expect any AT weapons would be usable from within or on top of a vehicle. Even modern day "soft launch" AT missiles have too much backblast for such conditions. Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boris Balaban Posted September 1, 2005 Share Posted September 1, 2005 Would they have room to move and turn and reload? :confused: In a HT you have cover but a soft skin vehicle like a truck or the out side of a tank, nothing to protect you. :eek: 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zalgiris 1410 Posted September 1, 2005 Share Posted September 1, 2005 Originally posted by Battlefront.com: Firing from within/ontop of a vehicle, under realistic circumstances, is on our list. We don't know how difficult it will be to acheive, but we're going to try to have it for the first release.Great to hear, but does that also mean troops from inside armoured half-tracks, please tell me that ya gonna try it so. :cool: 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted September 1, 2005 Share Posted September 1, 2005 Sure. The room needed to reload is quite small. Turning and what not... even the tight confines of the SPW 251 would allow for this. Other vehicles, such as the Soviet BMP series have the troops back to back facing outboard. They also provide each soldier with a periscope, an environmentally sealed and waterproof firing port, brass catcher, and gas vent. Neat little things... snap right onto the side of an AK and you're good to go! Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellfish Posted September 1, 2005 Share Posted September 1, 2005 Originally posted by Battlefront.com: Firing from within/ontop of a vehicle, under realistic circumstances, is on our list. We don't know how difficult it will be to acheive, but we're going to try to have it for the first release. No, I don't expect any AT weapons would be usable from within or on top of a vehicle. Even modern day "soft launch" AT missiles have too much backblast for such conditions. Steve To contradict this in a minor way - I was driving a vismod M113 at NTC in '99 and one of the grunts in back fired an ATWESS Dragon from the troop compartment hatch (IIRC we were hull down). Good news is that he killed the Bradley he shot at. Bad news, he set our bundled camo netting on fire and nearly got the diesel fuel spillage on the deck too. Lesson learned: You can put light infantry in an armored vehicle, but you can't convince them that they're in an armored vehicle. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denwad Posted September 1, 2005 Share Posted September 1, 2005 Aww dammit we can't get dudes shooting fausts from Kubelwagens in last ditch anti-tank defense of Berlin 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalem Posted September 1, 2005 Share Posted September 1, 2005 I think I just peed Mord's pants. -dale 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mord Posted September 1, 2005 Share Posted September 1, 2005 Originally posted by dalem: I think I just peed Mord's pants. -dale LMFAO. And here I thought those Depends Mace gave me were faulty...I see now there's a saboteur in my midst and Fruit Of The Looms. On a brighter if not wetter note, I will join you in this shower of golden joy for the info in this thread is worthy of a good undie soaking aswell! Mord. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted September 1, 2005 Share Posted September 1, 2005 You guys are...well...just weird. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalem Posted September 1, 2005 Share Posted September 1, 2005 Originally posted by Michael Emrys: You guys are...well...just weird. Michael Took you this long to notice? No wonder Seanachai hates you. -dale 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpitfireXI Posted September 1, 2005 Share Posted September 1, 2005 Taken from Battlefront.com "Other vehicles, such as the Soviet BMP series have the troops back to back facing outboard. They also provide each soldier with a periscope, an environmentally sealed and waterproof firing port, brass catcher, and gas vent. Neat little things... snap right onto the side of an AK and you're good to go!" hmmmmm........Cold war scenarios? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunnersman Posted September 1, 2005 Author Share Posted September 1, 2005 Originally posted by JonS: In an RSA I used to frequent they had a sign on the wall: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />No swearing aloudQuite clever really ... </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingknives Posted September 1, 2005 Share Posted September 1, 2005 Originally posted by Battlefront.com: Firing from within/ontop of a vehicle, under realistic circumstances, is on our list. We don't know how difficult it will be to acheive, but we're going to try to have it for the first release. No, I don't expect any AT weapons would be usable from within or on top of a vehicle. Even modern day "soft launch" AT missiles have too much backblast for such conditions. Steve Not even PIATs? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigduke6 Posted September 1, 2005 Share Posted September 1, 2005 There is of course the small issue that the BMP's, ah, rugged suspension system makes firing those small arms roughly as dangerous to the enemy, when in motion, as chucking the magazine straight into a lake. Also that periscope is not exactly the apex of Soviet optical technology, fogs in winter, steams up in humidity, and an itty-bitty field of vision. In Chechnya the users almost always are on top of the vehicle, firing ports and Chechen snipers be durned, it's mines they're worried about! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingknives Posted September 1, 2005 Share Posted September 1, 2005 Firing ports are a bad idea anyway unless you're fighting through fall-out. In conventional warfare, infantry really ought to dismount to fight. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YankeeDog Posted September 1, 2005 Share Posted September 1, 2005 There's an interesting bit in the CMBB forum about how the Soviets liked the Lend-Lease Shermans because they had smoother ride, and so were easier for infantry to ride and fire from. Apparently, they'd actually tie guys down onto the tanks as a defense against panzerfaust ambushes. Not sure if the guys tied on to the tank were more useful because they could shoot any assaulting IAT teams, or whether simply served as additional "armor". . . :eek: 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soddball Posted September 1, 2005 Share Posted September 1, 2005 Originally posted by flamingknives: Firing ports are a bad idea anyway unless you're fighting through fall-out. In conventional warfare, infantry really ought to dismount to fight. There were a pair of BMP-1s at the War and Peace Show. Every time I looked at them, all I could think they were good for was shooting rioting civilians. Stupid design. Can't hold enough soldiers to make any difference, crap armour against anything but molotov coctails. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted September 1, 2005 Share Posted September 1, 2005 BMP-1s hold as much infantry as pretty much any other armored grunt carrier. Good for pretty much nothing else, but troop capacity isn't its problem. But God help me... I want to own one of these suckers! Why? Because they are slick. Well, at least in a non-combat situation Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aka_tom_w Posted September 1, 2005 Share Posted September 1, 2005 BMP info if you are interested BMP -1 page -tom w 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barrold Posted September 1, 2005 Share Posted September 1, 2005 Not the best gas mileage though. Of course I would imagine clearing a path through traffic is easier than just using a little horn. BDH 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panzeh Posted September 1, 2005 Share Posted September 1, 2005 It takes a lot of space to load a PIAT. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mike Posted September 1, 2005 Share Posted September 1, 2005 No it doesn't - it takes no extra space at all....UNLESS you need to cock the weapon too 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.