We need tanks and APCs

[Raven1986]

Folks, as the title already states it, we need tanks, not just US but also NVA armor. I remember the tank battles in the Vietnam DLC for BC2. God that was fun! And no don't give me that bull**** the terrain was not suitable. I'm not talking about dense jungle maps such as Cambodian Incursion. Maps such as Cu Chi's flat rice fields would perfectly allow tanks to roll over them.

The helos are nice but it's not everything to the arsenal of the warring parties.

 

[RandomPerson78642]

And before anyone goes "tanks were not a thing lol", tanks were in fact used in Vietnam.
Not to the extent of WW2 of course, but they were still used quite a bit.

[video=youtube;w-eYoL6IZXg]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w-eYoL6IZXg[/video]

Ben Het is a perfect situation. It could be like the RO2 map Demyansk, NVA with 2 PT76 assaulting a US base defended by 1 M48 Patton.

Interiors would naturally be tossed out. They may be a selling point of RO2, but they're just too dang art heavy.

 

[Arisaka99]

Not to mention the 1972 Easter Offensive and 1975 Ho Chi Minh Offensive.
The North Vietnamese used a **** ton of tanks, and so did the South Vietnamese.

 

[Raven1986]

RO2 interiors were unnecessary in the first place. Why? The majority of time you played as infantry. Did yo have full body awareness? No. So you do not in RS2. Thus having interiors like in Ostfront is enough. Gotta keep with the rest of the game art here.

Gun with two hands hovering across the battlefield = no interior animations.

 

[TrOOper]

The vast majority of the maps are not big enough to add armor!

 

[Jagdwyre]

RO2 interiors were unnecessary in the first place. Why? The majority of time you played as infantry. Did yo have full body awareness? No. So you do not in RS2. Thus having interiors like in Ostfront is enough. Gotta keep with the rest of the game art here.

Gun with two hands hovering across the battlefield = no interior animations.

Yet helicopter interiors are modeled in RS2.

I suspect a ton of time was taken up from rigging all the animations of changing seats while inside the tanks, not just modeling the interiors.

 

[Flashburn]

Making a legit tank interior that is good does take a ton of time. But its rigging the damned thing all together that is the ball buster. IF making a good exterior model of a tank with textures takes like 2 weeks, the insides are probably gonna be 2x that if not longer. At least you don't need LOD's for the insides. But really is that getting all to work together where the time goes all stupid. But thats for a tank..

An APC is WAY easier. Something like an M113 ain't that bad at all. The thing is after all, a box. No big arse gun with breach and stowage, just an MG. Much easier thing to do.

 

[gimpy117]

after the debacle that was Ro2 tanks (sorry devs) i'd wait and have it done right...but the US doesn't need more vehicles. unless a map with no chopper has APC's and more Rpg's for the VC

 

[Grabbed_by_the_Spetsnaz]

The vast majority of the maps are not big enough to add armor!

Got to agree with this right now, the only map I can see having this is Cu Chi, with a light tank/AFV helping give the 2nd and 3rd point some additional fire support.

But we need bigger maps for vehicles to work for sure. (And IMHO, need bigger maps in general.)

 

[Arisaka99]

Got to agree with this right now, the only map I can see having this is Cu Chi, with a light tank/AFV helping give the 2nd and 3rd point some additional fire support.

But we need bigger maps for vehicles to work for sure. (And IMHO, need bigger maps in general.)

Perhaps Hue would be suitable for vehicles such as APCs, and perhaps light tanks.
Though yes, I agree that there needs to be more maps if tanks are added.

 

[Flashburn]

RO2 should tell us 1 thing. Don't retro add armored vehicles to maps. Build them in for NEW maps made around them. And M113 Acav makes sense here. But only IF its damage model actually attempts to mimic how things like RPG's work VS armor. The magic blow up thing of games is not that. Only 1 spot on an M113 might do that. And that is back left of hull where the fuel tank is. Front is mainly engine and transmission and a bit of driver with a thin bulk head behind engine and troop compartment. A hit to the front would probably not result in total destruction of vehicle. It probably just became a static MG nest. It might catch fire after that. Might not. But most of the crew might be a bloody mess but be alive and could bail from the vehicle before the M113 literally melts from a fire. Go aluminum armor!

Potential VC/NVA counter is of course the RPG. Should be a RPG-2 clone the B-40. But they screwed that one up already. Next is some kind of anti armor grenade like an RKG-3 or earlier. These are near useless VS real tanks of the era but still to this day mess up light armor. Just have to get close enough to use the thing right?

Now how players would use something like an M113 ACAV.... Probably badly for the most part. Like drive into the middle of the bad guys. Not how you probably want to use the thing. You got a M2 12.7mm MG that can stand off a hell of a long ways. You got gun shields for the TC. It could be a re-spawning platform. It could be a support asset to replace a helo. Tons of interesting things there. Although AM/TWI will for sure get how the M2 .50 cal works wrong. Like free handed with no T&e and no recoil like dskh. UGh. If they do this that is.

 

[Kingkat54]

I agree, only NEW MAPS should include armour. Like the Battle of Ap Boc, where the APC's were bogged down and rendered useless. Or the Battle of Long Vei, where NVA Armour were overpowering. Maybe a bulldozer to cut a path through the jungle? Lots of ideas.

 

[Arisaka99]

We're all on the same track, so I'll just add another shameless plug about the 1972 Easter Offensive and 1975 Spring Offensive
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Easter_Offensive
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1975_Spring_Offensive
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Ban_Me_Thuot
TAAAAANNKS
ARVN!

 

[powerbits]

i would implement those patrol boats...

 

[Raven1986]

The idea of using tanks or APCs is simple. The VC on Cu Chi need to be forced to cover. US forces almost can't use the tunnels as their fighting abilities are close to zero down there. Everyone who fought an AK or RPD with a bayonet knows this too well. Thus we need a powerful menace to allow surface advance of the US forces. An M113 would already be very good in this infantry support role.

Adding vehicles to a map after its built and released is not always good and advisible. But some maps had benefit from adding vehicles. I enjoyed Mamaryev with vehicles much more than the vanilla version.

 

[Xscout]

Since I'm an ex Cav Scout, I'd like to see the addition of M-113s and the equivalent on the NVA/VC side

 

[AntleredCormorant]

i would implement those patrol boats...

I see them functioning much like the UH-1 as far as game balance goes - a mobile spawn point with a couple of mg's or a cannon