M Hofbauer Posted August 29, 2000 Share Posted August 29, 2000 oh, I am totally easy about it, please don't misunderstand me, it's not as if I came here with an agenda to have the Luchs rehabilitated. My profileunder interests doesn't say "to make BTS change the Lynx to Luchs" or "educate people about the fact that who uses Lynx for the Luchs is evil" It's just that it wouldn't hurt anybody to have the correct name, especially if, like Vanir reported, there is a widespread misinformation, have the people know the real name, educational value of CM and all.... all in all, it would be an uncomplicated rectification showing that GrosseZeitWeichzeug takes care even of such small details such as vehicle names? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Talley Posted August 30, 2000 Author Share Posted August 30, 2000 Interesting discussion although it has drifted from whether light tanks should be included in the vehicle category. Does anyone feel that Stuarts and Lynx(Luches) should be included in the vehicle category due to their lack of major anti-armor or anti-infantry capability? Because of the point structure, I don't buy Stuarts when I have more vehicle points and can buy M-8's. Should capability rather than formal categories define the availability of units in the vehicle or armor categories? By the way, I am used to using Luch for the 70's era German recce unit but use Lynx for the WWII version. I think most people would recognize either name w/o too much difficulty. Ken Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts