Jump to content

AAV inaccuracy....


Recommended Posts

So I'm playing the second scenario in the USMC campaign. Toward the middle of the mission I attempt to seize an objective with three AAVs with infantry aboard. The objective is a building with a small wall that surrounding... However, it seems in Combat Mission the 64,000 pound AAV-7 is no match for the masonry of a three foot wall. I was unable to cross over the wall put my troops in a safer position to dismount and assault the building. 

Why can't AAVs breach walls? I have witnessed an AAV topple a wall much larger. Here is a video that demonstrates my point: 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know nothing of how they're actually used, but would that be done in combat?  (The behavior of the crew up top suggests that they're not worried about coming under fire.)

Slowly crawling through a wall like like (or, more likely, pushing it down into a rubble pile and then backing away for the dismounts to clamber over) seems like a good way to get RPG'd by whoever is on the other side.

In any case, yeah, CM doesn't yet model all potential vehicle behavior, most especially vehicles that might be used to clear mines and breach walls.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, WriterJWA said:

So I'm playing the second scenario in the USMC campaign. Toward the middle of the mission I attempt to seize an objective with three AAVs with infantry aboard. The objective is a building with a small wall that surrounding... However, it seems in Combat Mission the 64,000 pound AAV-7 is no match for the masonry of a three foot wall. I was unable to cross over the wall put my troops in a safer position to dismount and assault the building. 

Why can't AAVs breach walls? I have witnessed an AAV topple a wall much larger. Here is a video that demonstrates my point: 

 

That would be nice instead of wasting charges to breach a flimsy wall like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, sburke said:

Because players never get that this is a rare event and we'd do it all the time.  Take a look at the AAVs in Al Nasiriyah and tell me you are gonna drive those around anywhere near enemy RPGs on a regular basis or risk the mobility of your AAV just to knock a hole in a wall.

Yes. Exactly that. It was done in Iraq routinely as a breaching option in lieu of explosives. All the time. Gates, wall, etc... It is not even remotely a rare event. Don't alter physics just for the purpose of "gaming" players in a direction that you deem accurate when in fact it's not. 

Edited by WriterJWA
Link to comment
Share on other sites

routinely? I don't know for sure one way or the other but it isn't my impression that it was routinely done at all.

Either way I don't see it changing.  The same would then apply for every heavy vehicle.  I have heard of tanks occasionally doing it as well, not necessarily being happy about it but doing it).  It has been debated on here before and the Armor guys seem to think it is not something they'd particularly want to do often.  That is from a limited pool of responses though.  Honestly I think the AI issues would be more the reason BF would object.

Edited by sburke
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the game tracked vehicles will currently run over low rural walls without hesitation, and will most likely come away with a little  track damage because of it. Proper masonry and concrete walls would be even more problematic. People already complain about  vehicles getting stuck in muddy or boggy ground. I don't think they'd want even more stuff to get stuck on. Here's a pict of a Challenger 2 hung up on some concrete and rebar.

stuck on wall.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a former armor crewman, I can confirm that this is not a thing I would want my tank to do on a regular basis.  

 

Track is heavy and a real PITA to fix, especially under fire.  Add a level or two of difficulty for having to fix it while not in the motor pool....

 

If the crunchies have demo, armor should sit back a bit and use all those wonderful weapon systems to support.  IMO of course.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...