This might blur the line but since your suggestion included the Type 94 you cannot forget about the L3/35, my beloved:
4 Likes
The Sd.Kfz.7 is a prime mover and not an armored personnel carrier, but it is still an “APC”. That’s why I prefer the term Transport because APCs were specific vehicles
But the point is that it is a vehicle that carries a substantial amount of soldiers
It should most definitely be overhauled to being a combat vehicle
Mechanical dragoons as in they are a small infantry unit that rides ahead of foot infantry and dismounts for combat, like the original horse dragoons. It’s how vehicles replaced horses.
Barely anyone uses them. I like and use them for variety but the bikes are gimmicky and you can barely drive without getting stuck on a pebble. They’re fun just for riding around a little bit
That is true but I view them as infantry because they are intended to mostly fight on foot. Sure ride the bike to get their, but that’s why they can have multiple other classes like APC. They are infantry classes with a vehicle sprinkled in
I somewhat agree with you. If they just made Motorcycles a light “APC” there wouldn’t be so many debates about them. But I like it because they do represent Germany and SU that mass used motorcycle infantry so alas
That is a huge and complicated debate about vehicles which is why I prefer my simple organization. Riders are Motorcycles, APC are Transport vehicles, and Combat Vehicles are any vehicle that supports infantry. Simply, let me be the judge 
It’s like the Panzer IV, Stug A, Sd.Kfz.251/9, Sd.Kfz.234/3. All have the same exact gun and the only difference is what they are. Yes they were used in different unit types but I think it’s a little pointless if we start divvying them up. Just let the player choose whatever vehicle to support the team and go
Personally I’m fine with my simple system of how I think the game should be organized. I know it’s not perfect, but I think it’s ideal. My only wish was the game was larger and there could be a lot more vehicles on the field. With more than 2 slots, let’s say maybe even 10, it doesn’t matter if 3 players are Flakpanzers and 2 are Stugs, and 1 is a King Tiger.
2 Likes
that’s partially false.
While it was used to carry artillery pieces, it was also used as personell carrier
more so the americans versions with HMGs and what not.
… i’m afraid it’s a bit late now.
but i more or less agree and understand.
Except the bike is literally the tool of bikers.
if you take that away, what are you left with.
an underpowered infantry squad?
and why?
Fun fact. Dr. Hugh Cairns, noted that motorcycles had the highest casualty and fatality rates per vehicle in service.
For good reasons too.
but dismounting wasn’t always done.
it could be done.
and as far enlisted goes, it’s tipically if you lost your bike or if you are placing a bike to then swing away.
because most enlisted players are the W hold LMB kind.
Bikers are certainly a stiff class and unusual from the usual gameplay.
but not a gimmick at all.
i personally love them and are my top 1 favorite class due to the sheer amount of things can do, and even better, COULD BE / DO.
- support for ammo and medkits ( there’s also the radioman or medics )
- place down rallies
- flank and take down infantry or other rallies
- extreamely versatile with specializations
- take down enemy armored threats with the the AT trooper
- speed to get just about anywhere
while the physic is not the best for such vehicles, as long you use the throttle right and not full speed, you can just about traverse most terrains.
but just because barely uses them, doesn’t mean they are bad by default.
as they say, " a bad craftman blames his tools ".
and the bikes definitely is one of the best tools out there to cover a wider range of duties.
EVEN if they are extreamely fragile.
but, that’s kinda the whole stick.
No risks, no rewards.
with that being said, to cover the potential aspects, i’m sure vehicles with more than 3 crew for higher brs could have their spot light.
but generally, add ww2 vehicles such as armored cars and jeeps, by all acounts, falls under riders for what they do and can be.
it doesn’t have to be just bikes per say.
80% of the time will be spent on the bike for mobility.
cause it’s still an infantry game. and the main machinegun on the bike can take care of that.
20% will be spent dismount to perform specialists actions ( such as placing down medkits, or take out enemy vehicles with the at gunner )
why would you want sudden troops appear out of bikes or cars?
that doesn’t make sense
i don’t want 3 classes to grind where there can be just 2.
Apc and infantry motorized vehicles.
one pops out out of thin air soldiers, the others make sure to kill and hunt said vehicles.
cat and mouse.
not… cat and mouse… and… dog?
( technically, the tanks are already the " dogs ". so no need for something else entirely )
yes but not.
while it’s great to use said vehicles to support the team, context and feasability matters.
the stug is a tank(destroyer)
the 251/9 and sdkfz 234/3 are not.
hence, should be riders ( beside ,you can easily destroy them unlike tanks even if they camp in the gray area ) but that can be controversial.
i’d be fine with adding more suitable nations variants for all factions though.
so it’s not just germany.
you kinda make it out to be the only solution.
which i’m sorry to say, but it’s rather flawed and vague with misconception about the class it self.
while trying to shuffle an entire section of vehicles under another that they werent supposed to in the first place.
1 Like
I would also like to see these models added:
M3a3 recce
Vickers crossley
Daimler dingo
AS-42
T-37A
Sdkfz 231
Chevrolet 1533 SAS
Steyr 1500a with 20mm field mod cannon
8 Likes
They can leave the original event as legacy content, and re-release a new one. Properly
The Rider is highly incentivized to dismount, thus why I say it’s basically infantry. I also want to give them an option to spawn on foot like Paratroopers and APC
Then we come to the argument, why should the Panzer 1 and 2 be tank slots, and the 251/9 and 234/3? The 1 and 2 are fully armored with an enclosed rotating turret, they are tanks by literal definition. So the halftrack and car which are better than them aren’t vehicles slots but the little Panzer 2 is? See my point, that’s why I prefer simplicity. I just say it doesn’t matter whether you spawn as the Panzer 1,2, 251/9,234/3, Tiger, Stug, Flammpanzer, etc. Just spawn and do your job
I am looking at the game overhead. Ok vehicles can be divided into 3 main family, fully tracked, half-tracked, wheeled. It gets more complicated. Some wheeled vehicles were designated tank destroyers and AA etc. Not all half-tracks were troop carriers, for example all the various 251 variants. Some fully tracked vehicles were used as APCs such as the British Kangaroos. So what we need to divide the vehicles into 3 groups and then double or even triple the amount of classes so we have
- fully tracked combat vehicles
- fully tracked transport vehicles
- fully tracked scout vehicles
- half-tracked combat vehicles
- half-tracked transport vehicles
- half-tracked scout vehicles
- wheeled combat vehicles
- wheeled transport vehicles
- wheeled scout vehicles
So what we just add over 6 total classes? That just starts getting convoluted.
This is all because people complain about “wasting a slot”. To me it seems their real problem is just with low tier vehicles so they make a big deal about it.
That’s why I think my system is best.
We CONTINUALLY ask for them…we got Saboteurs instead.
2 Likes
And honestly I don’t think is should be a Rider class…it should have it’s own class as there are entry level vehicles and then more heavily armoured and armed ones for class levels.
Riders ride…Drivers drive…the motorcycles need an overhaul to make them useful.
I don’t think armored vehicles for riders is a good idea. Even though tankettes are cool. I love vehicles but I think it would make the game too vehicle-centric.
But I think jeep-like cars with mgs are alright.
All I’d say is make the Kubelwagen’s gun the MG-42 mount, rather than the MG-34.
4 Likes
Developers shouldn’t waste resources on unnecessary stuff that doesn’t fit in with the game’s concept and gameplay.
You don’t need vehicles like that. It’s usually about 100 meters from the base spawn to the objective.
And thanks to rally points, it’s 50 meters. Vehicles like that will never really work in this game. They’ll always just be gimmicks. A liability to your teammates.
(And no, they’re definitely not good for flanking. They can be easily spotted and marked). It’s way much easier to just sneak past enemies with a single engineer.
it’s incredible how many bad takes one can have-
never cease to fully amaze.
but no.
none of that is remotely true.
cars do have their places much like bikes.
else would have been removed a long time ago.
if you can’t use them, that’s on you pal.
not the tools being given.
… there’s no such thing as team liability either in a sandbox lol.
unless you’re actively team killing.
4 Likes
Riders are not dragoons
1 Like
Yeah, because that’s what happened to aircrafts with no CAS.
they are still in the game and kinda useful as dog fighters.
or, destroy APC from the skies.
2 Likes
Riders can take a variety of classes. They are incentivized to dismount and fight on the ground. Just like horse dragoons.
I think there’s nothing wrong with planes without ground weaponry. Sure having bombs or rockets are nice, but you can still fight planes and you can still strafe the ground.
I think they should add more
they are not, because the squad is too weak. Those classes are for exploiting flanks.
This design concept is both brilliant and highly practical.
There is an obvious coordination flaw in the current gameplay: many tank players adopt rigid tactics, merely staying far back to fire from a distance instead of coordinating with infantry to eliminate enemy emplacements, which severely hinders infantry advances.
Existing armored personnel carriers are mainly designed as mobile respawn points, whose core function is to offer secondary respawns for frontline infantry. They can only deliver sporadic fire support during assaults. To maximize respawn efficiency, these vehicles mostly have to stay stationary, making them unfit for sustained frontline suppression missions.
Hence, the game needs a dedicated mobile fire platform with superior durability. If a tank gets destroyed, our infantry will lose heavy armor cover at once and become vulnerable to enemy vehicles. In contrast, losing an anti-infantry gun vehicle bears little cost, as tanks will still be there to provide backup, so players do not need to hesitate to risk it.
In conclusion, adding a vehicle dedicated to accompanying infantry and providing consistent close-range fire support is completely necessary.
As for troop classes, I don’t think we need to add a new armed jeep unit—just assign this vehicle to the rider class instead. As for the armored fighting vehicle variant, its crew slot should remain exclusive to the armored vehicle driver.