Will the Stryker die a lot?

[hoolaman]

In light of Hezbollah sucess against the heavily armoured Merkava and seeming ability to go toe to toe with the Israeli ground forces, it would seem CMSF could certainly be very challenging for the US player.

I was wondering if the current generation of Strykers were deployed in what I imagine could be similar tactical circumstances in Syria, would they be too vulnerable.

It is one thing to drive them around downtown Baghdad where there seems to be a lack of any large or sophisticated AT threats, but another to put them in the path of high velocity AT guns and modern ATGMs.

What would it take to kill a Stryker?

[FAI]

Originally posted by Hoolaman:

It is one thing to drive them around downtown Baghdad where there seems to be a lack of any large or sophisticated AT threats, but another to put them in the path of high velocity AT guns and modern ATGMs.

What would it take to kill a Stryker?

A modern RPG round is enough. Or two older RPG round striking roughly the same spot (the first to defeat the slat armour). Or any tandem warhead.

[flamingknives]

I'm pretty sure that the slat armour is more effective against older rounds. There's a design flaw/feature on the old PG7 rounds that the slat armour exploits. It basically shorts the fuse so it doesn't even go off.

A modern one would probably work though, if you get close enough.

[M1A1TC]

I am not going to use them at all. Ill just have heavy armor with "crunchies" force

[undead reindeer cavalry]

Originally posted by Hoolaman:

What would it take to kill a Stryker?

a 23mm AA gun.

[Blofeld]

I presume Strykers will be like german halftracks in CMx1, great for moving troops quickly around the battlefield, but highly vulnerable to any serious enemy firepower.

[Battlefront.com]

Knowing how you idjits handle things like Panthers and King Tigers, yeah... I expect most Strykers to be smoked pretty quickly

Seriously though, it all comes down to how well you use them. If you try rushing into places and bulling your way through scnearios, you will likely lose a lot of everything (Strykers included). The key to defeating an enemy force, especially one that uses unconventional tactics, is to be methodical in your approach. The Thunder Run in Baghdad was a rather unique set of circumstances that Syria (and everybody else) is as aware of as we here are. If resistance holds, a repeat Thunder Run in CM:SF will likely fail very badly.

As for the chances of losing something on the battlefield... all vehicles are somewhat equally vulnerable. The Syrians will have AT-14 KORONET-E and RPG-29s available. That means smoking heaps of Abrams if you aren't careful, not to mention Strykers. The Coallition forces in Iraq have been fortunately to not run up against this stuff in any significant quantities (knocks on wood) unlike the Israelis.

Oh, and a big IED placed in the right spot will do more than scuff the paint on an Abrams, so don't expect anything else to come off better.

Steve

[oren_m]

It's all nice and good, but it think that with the current circumstance any US involovement in syria will cause Israel to join.

Now, the big qustion is where will the US forces will enter Syria from, Iraq? Turkey? or from the sea.

In this case Syria will handle 2 front, which with the currnet quality of the Syrian army is not good news for them.

You also have to remember that the Syrian army is under traind, maybe even less traind the Hizballah.

Oren_m

[Battlefront.com]

I picture the major push coming from Iraq. Depending on the political circumstances, a push could be made through Lebanon and out of Turkey. But Syria would have to be clearly the sort of rogue state that pretty much all nations would agree needed to be knocked out. Again, akin to Afghanistan and not Iraq.

As for Israel going into Syria... not unless it was directly attacked can I see that happening. The reaction in Arab and Muslim countries would be overwhelmingly, and horridly, negative. It would make things 10 times worse. Even if Syria launched a ground invasion on Israel, and the IDF went into unquestioned Syrian territory... there would be major negative ramifications. The US, the West, and Israel have a nearly unblemished record of playing into the hands of the terrorists, so who knows... they might just be idiotic enough to do it some more

Steve

[hellfish]

My memory fails me on occasion, but didn't Israel stop at the gates of Damascus in 1973? Was it due to threats of Soviet intervention, the futility of occupying a city that big, US pressure or something else?

[Battlefront.com]

IIRC Israel stopped because it had won and pushing on could only make things worse. The IDF was not (and is not) set up for protracted, high intensity warfare and was at risk of losing its edge. I'm sure Israeli commanders were looking at Germany's early successes in WWII and found themselves thinking the same thing most WWII historians think... they should have stopped after crushing everybody that bordered them.

I'm sure there was pressure and threats too, but I've got to believe that at the heart was some sound military thinking.

Steve

[BeauCoupDinkyDau]

Ooooh. We get to plant IEDs in CM:SF? Can we remote detonate them, or will they be more like a mine?

[Battlefront.com]

Both

Steve

[BeauCoupDinkyDau]

Nice.

[oren_m]

Could we get cell phone IEDs?

[hoolaman]

Steve,

I don't start a topic like this to attack the game or the concept. If anything recent events prove that your fictional scenario could be much more challenging (fun to play) than most people would think.

I hope that your backstory can take into account recent events as it will make the game a lot more believable. Maybe you guys thought about it so hard that you really will be "overtaken by events"

[Sixxkiller]

What types of IED? Will this include all the way up to say 105mm Arty shells? Man I dont know if I like this to be honest. It may bring back some close calls that so far I havent had nightmares about....

[Sixxkiller]

Also I imagine there will be support teams located around the area to engage disabled or isolated vehicles. I must say that the scope of this game is amazing. I think the military would be wise to use this as a tool before sending troops over. And I havent even seen the game yet, but with this feature I think it could be valuable.

[Shmavis]

Originally posted by fytinghellfish:

My memory fails me on occasion, but didn't Israel stop at the gates of Damascus in 1973? Was it due to threats of Soviet intervention, the futility of occupying a city that big, US pressure or something else?

They didn't get nearly so close. There were various influential factors, and I believe the IDF took more territory in the area than in had in the 1967 War, but having the Golan Heights back was basically enough for them.

[oren_m]

There you go, i found this before and after map in Wikipedia.

Golan Heights

[Sgt Joch]

Regarding the 1973 push to Damascus, the objective was to seize the high ground just outside the suburbs to threathen the city with artillery fire. It was hoped that this would force Syria to accept a cease-fire.

However, the operation was stopped short by stronger than expected syrian resistance and the arrival of fresh Iraqi forces.

[M1A1TC]

Will US have SWORDS or any other Unmanned Ground Vehicles to counteract IEDs?

[BeauCoupDinkyDau]

Originally posted by Sixxkiller:

I think the military would be wise to use this as a tool before sending troops over.

Didn't a few different military organizations use the original CM games as a training tool?

[hellfish]

The Aussies use CMAK - I don't know if it's a training tool or more of a historical learning aid.

[juan_gigante]

Originally posted by Sixxkiller:

What types of IED? Will this include all the way up to say 105mm Arty shells? Man I dont know if I like this to be honest. It may bring back some close calls that so far I havent had nightmares about....

I've heard of shells much larger than that being used as IEDs in Iraq - 155s and larger. So, I'd expect 105s at the minimum.