Jump to content

American/Afghan module?


Recommended Posts

Sounds good to me. It may help push sales in the US when Battlefront distributes this since Afghanistan may be in our national conscience for the next few years.

The drawbacks with a US/Afghan module would be that there are far fewer AFVs involved (at least the heavy ones) since Afghanistan is mostly an infantry-based fight. And new models would probably be needed such as MRAP-type vehicles. So some more effort would probably be needed than just moving some of the models over from CMSF. However I think it would be a great idea and would definitely have some appeal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One supposes they'd have to farm-out a U.S.-Afghanistan module. I can't imagine BFC continuing to do new work in the CMSF-based game engine after NATO. Plus BFC has so many game titles on their to-do list where would they find the time?

One problem I do see is events are still unfolding. The title would be left hanging with no finale, and the 4 months (minimum?) required to produce it would involve a lot of nail biting on the developer's part. The last thing they'd want is history catching up with them unexpectedly before they get to release. It would be rather like someone trying to produce a Vietnam wargame in 1967.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Define MRAP. I was under the impression that MRAPs come in all kinds of shapes and sizes. Surely they can't all be bad?

It's like NASCAR, Demolition Derby, and Big Redneck Truck all combined into one awful vehicle. They were okay in the beginning, but now the bad guys use bigger bombs. If someone knew the ratio of KIA/WIA due to accidents and hostile action, I would like to see it.

Oh, stay away from the windows after an IED goes off!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's like NASCAR, Demolition Derby, and Big Redneck Truck all combined into one awful vehicle. They were okay in the beginning, but now the bad guys use bigger bombs. If someone knew the ratio of KIA/WIA due to accidents and hostile action, I would like to see it.

Oh, stay away from the windows after an IED goes off!

The MRAP was designed for fat, lazy Soldiers who want to go on 'patrol' but dont want to get out of their vehicle. No kidding! I can say that, because I'm a Soldier and I'm often in an MRAP (not to my pleasure)

You want a wheeled armored vehicle...STRYKER is your answer. At least you can fight from it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The MRAP was designed for fat, lazy Soldiers who want to go on 'patrol' but dont want to get out of their vehicle. No kidding! I can say that, because I'm a Soldier and I'm often in an MRAP (not to my pleasure)

You want a wheeled armored vehicle...STRYKER is your answer. At least you can fight from it.

I know we clashed about Strykers once, but I would rather chill in a Stryker than one of these things. Also, I read this week that 2 HBCTs are being converted to SBCTs, including the 3rd ACR. Pretty interesting, if you ask me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know we clashed about Strykers once, but I would rather chill in a Stryker than one of these things. Also, I read this week that 2 HBCTs are being converted to SBCTs, including the 3rd ACR. Pretty interesting, if you ask me.

Hmm. Not sure how I feel about that.

I ****-talk the Bradley alot, but I still respect the vehicle for its capabilities.

Someone with Stars on their chest is trying to come up with a 1-size fits all solution. I dont think its the right answer. Dont get me wrong. I'm all for MORE Stryker units, but it's apples and oranges.

Stryker Brigade's have done great for the current fight in Iraq, but this isnt the end-all. There will be another conflict, in which we will need the heavy cav. I dont think we should be hanging up the tanker boots just yet.

The Army really needs to re-evaluate this MRAP program. I'm telling you, this is a HORRIBLE vehicle. Its great that it protects Soldiers from IED's, but you CANNOT fight from the vehicle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm. Not sure how I feel about that.

I ****-talk the Bradley alot, but I still respect the vehicle for its capabilities.

Someone with Stars on their chest is trying to come up with a 1-size fits all solution. I dont think its the right answer. Dont get me wrong. I'm all for MORE Stryker units, but it's apples and oranges.

Stryker Brigade's have done great for the current fight in Iraq, but this isnt the end-all. There will be another conflict, in which we will need the heavy cav. I dont think we should be hanging up the tanker boots just yet.

The Army really needs to re-evaluate this MRAP program. I'm telling you, this is a HORRIBLE vehicle. Its great that it protects Soldiers from IED's, but you CANNOT fight from the vehicle.

This week's Army Times had a projected date for the retirement of AFVs. According to the chart, Stryker is supposed to last until 2029 (almost a decade past Bradley) and retire around the same time as the Abrams.

It does seem that someone is going Stryker-Crazy. How are they doing in Afghanistan?

Uhm, aren't they the armoured replacement for trucks? If they aren't the greatest combat vehicles, it's because they are not combat vehicles.

I'd rather have a humvee. Lower profile, more maneuverable, quicker, won't give me cancer, won't electrocute me if I hit power lines (which I wouldn't, anyway), etc.

Remember that there is the intended use vs the actual use. Soldiers think of MRAP as some kind of armoured fighting platform and never ever ever ever ever ever ever ever get out of the things. I'm exaggerating, sure, but that's the idea. No point in ground troops if they're just creeping along in their armoured vehicles all the time and never getting out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd rather have a humvee. Lower profile, more maneuverable, quicker

I'm remnded of reports from the 'bad times' 4(?) years ago that Strykers had become such a trophy prize for insurgents that the vehicles were parked for awhile and patrols were being conducted by less conspicuous Humvees.

The closest thing CMSF has to MRAPS is the Marine module MTVR armored truck (except that MTVR can carry many more soldiers). I've seen the MTVR praised in-game for its welcome stockpile of acquireable ammo, but nobody's praised MTVR's fighting ability.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi,

It's very interesting what I'm reading here, as long as the Spanish Army is going to deploy "soon" (after two years) the first MRAP RG-31 Mk5Es with RCWS Mini Samson in Afghanistan, and we are looking forward to seeing a good number of them there since the currently deployed BMR 6x6 wheeled APC is an outdated vehicle (from the 70s) that turns into shrapnel when it receives a blast. A mobile coffin, name it. The new 8x8 wheeled APC project for the Spanish Army is still going to take some years (and many changes in the Army structure) to see some light, so the question is: what's wrong with those MRAPs? The U.S. Army/Marine Corps and Canada use the same model in Afghanistan (and the turn over feature is not a good reason for me but with this crazy TOW model: all wheeled armoured vehicles overturn when doing sharp turns at high speed). Clavicula Nox, how can you prefer an underprotected Humvee over a MRAP when IEDs are a major threat when patrolling in Afghanistan? Cpt. Mike, Strykers/APCs vs MRAPs... well, I guess it depends if the country's defense budget will be cut down or not: MRAPs are much more cheaper and the infantry in the back isn't supposed to fight from neither carrier ;)

Cheers,

Lomir

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Clavicula Nox, how can you prefer an underprotected Humvee over a MRAP when IEDs are a major threat when patrolling in Afghanistan?

And then you hit a mine, and your chances of getting cancer are spoiled forever.

To me the vehicle is better then it's usage.

I have been IED'd many times and, magically, I am still here. I'll clarify my position a bit. I would rather have a humvee with no doors, no armor whatsoever than an MRAP.

To counter the armor of MRAP, bad guys make bigger bombs. Now what?

Now I have to ask: how do MRAPs give you cancer?

Has to do with the chemical compound in the windows changing after explosions. I don't know the science behind it, but it has come up repeatedly in articles criticizing the vehicle as a whole.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been IED'd many times and, magically, I am still here. I'll clarify my position a bit. I would rather have a humvee with no doors, no armor whatsoever than an MRAP.

Well, it's a very surprising stance. Since I'm never been near any of the MRAPs I'll bow to your wisdom. But it's very unexpected. And this is a view you hold for all models?

To counter the armor of MRAP, bad guys make bigger bombs. Now what?

More spectacular Youtube videos. What else did you think you were fighting for?! :D;)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, it's a very surprising stance. Since I'm never been near any of the MRAPs I'll bow to your wisdom. But it's very unexpected. And this is a view you hold for all models?

I wouldn't be so quick to call it "wisdom". I'm just slightly claustrophobic, I think. My preference would be to walk rather than ride in a humvee, and my preference would be to wear no armor with helmet optional. I recognize that there is a time and place for all things, I just don't think MRAP has one. I think the vehicle is a political necessity rather than a military one. When bombs and bullets were slicing through unarmored vehicles and people, the solution was to armor both. When they build bigger bombs to destroy the humvees, the answer was to roll out a Military Monster Truck in time for the big rally and now the enemy is adapting accordingly. Do we build a bigger truck? At what point do we realize we're spending too much money and simply can't afford the things anymore?

I believe that I am in the minority when it comes to armor and armored vehicles, but that's okay.

More spectacular Youtube videos. What else did you think you were fighting for?! :D;)

:) I thought we were after the oil.

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...