Nicoch

Yeah, it's just one of the many game-breaking bugs.

The world must know the answer to this.

Maybe not, but can you really blame the men for wanting them to be armored when there's rarely any way to predict when and where they're going to be shot at over there? They can't be in a stryker or a bradley 24/7.

I'll try to find more things about the survivability of the stryker. http://www.blackanthem.com/News/U_S_Military_19/Stryker_increases_troops_survivability3281.shtml "A 172nd Stryker Brigade Combat Team Soldier told Lopez that he survived 11 different IEDs and went home safely with the rest of his unit, recalled Lopez with pride." "We have Strykers drive away from an IED strike with all eight tires flat, roll into the (forward operating base), get refitted with new tires and equipment and be back on the streets within hours." This one is several years old, but oh well. I keep seeing promising links to articles that are dead. http://www.usarpac.army.mil/news/xform/aerospace-ddr_052704.asp "The first SBCT has had no fatalities from RPGs and only one fatality, from a grenade. Two vehicles have been lost, to secondary fires, he said." Interesting note: When one of my bradlies is hit by a tank, there's usually more survivors than there are when a stryker is hit by an RPG. [ November 29, 2007, 04:03 PM: Message edited by: Nicoch ]

What do you mean I'm not sincere?

"In Iraq, Slat armor proved quite successful in defeating attacks of High Explosive Anti-Tank (HEAT) of Rocket Propelled Grenade (RPGs)." "In one mission, a Stryker vehicle, with slat armor, was attacked and hit with nine RPGs." "The crew escaped with minor injuries and the vehicle moved under its own power to the nearest operating base for assessment and repair." But I guess you could argue that it didn't specify if they were HEAT or HE, which I'm sure you will do. I'd like to think they'd be smart enough to use HEAT, personally.

Sure, but that's not the problem. I don't have an issue with BMPs taking strykers out, though the mortality rate is still high. The problem was RPG-7s, the very thing the stryker was made to survive, killing everyone on board almost 100% of the time. Every now and then I'll see an RPG hit and only immobilize it (another thing they really don't do), but that's pretty rare. Usually it's a one shot kill.

Okay, then disregard him. Another line was supplied from defense-review, which is most certainly reputable, citing similar survivability.

Mikey: I thought range was irrelevant to the target with HE? Adam: I understand that, but maybe it was meant that it was similar enough that both were able to survive the common threats faced. When was the last time an insurgent went after a stryker column with BMP-2s?

Well, that's probably why it says "about the same". And yes, strykers can of course be destroyed, but that's not what the issue was. Yes, they needed major depot rebuilding, but more than likely they got to the depot under their own power. The issue was crew or passengers are practically never killed or seriously wounded after multiple hits while in-game a single RPG-7 will likely kill everyone in the vehicle and set it on fire.

For me it's Pacific General (I like it more than Panzer really), Close Combat II, and Steel Panthers: World at War.

Aww, how cute, stupid political discussions from people that think they're witty. Honestly, isn't there another forum or another topic you could do that in instead of a serious topic with a suggestion for simplifying map making?

I always found it amusing when they say it 5 or 6 times in a row and their leader tells them to excercise noise discipline.

They weren't abandoned, they were burning. I don't see how those can be re-crewed. So why would it alert me to the presence of burning UAZs that are part of the scenery?

There's not even bunkers. There's no enemy in my LOS. The closest thing to an enemy is a few burning trucks as part of the map, and there's problems if those are causing it.

Every few seconds I hear "enemy vehicle sighted" when there's none in sight.

Ah, I see. I couldn't remember if it was the 2 spot or the 3 spot that was getting it.

This was pretty informative. I always assumed the slat armor was just a lightweight kind of spaced armor to take a little of the brunt of the jet away.

It's rather discouraging. I only played a demo of one of the CM games a few years back, which I loved, but couldn't remember the name of until recently. But seeing crap like that go on makes me unlikely to buy their future titles.

So what's the point in claiming to fix something if they don't do so?

I just installed the patch yesterday, and I noticed the patch notes mention that the anti-tank specialist is more likely to pull the Javelin now, but after several dozen times not once has he picked it up, it's always been the third member of the first team. Also, it says area fire now spreads fire amongst all areas on a target building level, but I've seen that they just hit the same spot over and over like before. At least vehicles do, normally my infantry is too fragile to be doing much supressing anyway. Is this a problem on my end, or is it a problem with the patch?