Hmm. lol.
Please elaborate.
there was also a version with an armored turret
and this one is armed with a flak20mm
and also flamethrowers
it could also have an armored roof
or protective armor that covered all sides
-
and let’s not forget the Dovunque 35 Protetto
-
AS43 Autoprotetto
- Cingoletta 2800
- as an event vehicle the prototype of the 626 Protetto
3 Likes
yes because I realized I concluded wrong first, don’t get me wrong I like your idea of giving us APC III Squads.
but my take is
We need a truck APC for germany
definetely that one
It’s so representative it should definetely be there in the tech tree for US
I’m not too sure about htis vehicle in the game
Why not…?
Leaving aside that the suggestion is still only about the squad type itself, not individual vehicles, why shouldn’t the game include the most common of the Kangaroo APCs…?
Naturally, and I should have included that, my bad.
As I have written in a previous topic of mine; “nothing happens in a vacuum”. I am very much inspired by what others write on this forum, when I make my own suggestions.
1 Like
They are as of now NOT factions, they just mash in there… WHEN we get Italy and UK as their own Factions then Yes! ohh I wait for that day man…
yeha the problem comes from different factions used different strategies and terms for all of it, sure germany had dedicated mechanized Infantry, but in reality they mostly used trucks and horse to get anywhere…
WW2 was mostly fought on foot and transported on rails, horses or trucks
Not agree because the Universal Carriers were definetely used in the ‘‘APC’’ role
mainly as Infantry transport, ammo and weapon carriers.
False, They are in the role they should be
yeah they should have M5
I could also see a captured M3 half-track for germany as event Squad, much like the universal carriers Squad for Japan.
as for the Kangaroos
but actually they weren’t… only a few existed at a time, as in effect no standard produced and maintanined vehicles. they were field mod that were available in few numbers at a time, sure in the end numbered to more thant japan used the Ho-Ha but that ain’t saying much.
A good representative,
giving fair immerson to the different factions WW2
is having:
Sd.Kfz 251 for Germany
Universal Carriers for British
M3 Half-Tracks for US aswell as the LVTs
GAZ trucks for Soviets.
and all these we have save for US with the Half-Track
AS I said I do liek the idea of giving us more flavour in the addition of Rider III Squads with new vehicles but…
It’s not so urgently needed both in terms of value to the factions relative to faction power nor for the games schedule for anytime soon focus or dedicate resoursces on this.
i’d rather see them first fix say Aircraft being able to use camos just like any other vechle…
or say game changing things like Historical Battles matchups
Edit, good post though and I like the Idea!
What do you mean “false”…?
They’re utility carriers, artillery tractors, ammunition ferriers, cable layers, etc.
Do you know what they were not used for…?
Transporting infantry sections… you couldn’t fit one back there even if you tried!
As how Rider vehicles work right now in game, small squad + carrying ammunition for allies, Universal Carriers would be the perfect evolution on that concept! That is why I believe that tech tree UCs should be rider vehicles, then we can have tech tree M5 half-tracks in the APC role.
You can’t argue that this doesn’t make much more sense…?
How is half a thousand of Ram Kangaroos, alone, “only a few”…?
Still, I’m trying to point out that you are underestiamting their numbers, not that they were common on a relative level.
On a relative level, only the US should get to have APCs, with over 50k M3s being produced, but that wouldn’t be fair, nor would it be in keeping with how the game handles content…
This is not how the game handles inclusions, though…
Tech Tree content is aimed to achieve parity with other factions, not just what was historically common.
As if nerfs and mechanical changes to current owners of things was any concern to you.
I don’t need to elaborate… you already know… and it furthers my beliefs that you crowd use one sided logic.
Another example… you say half a thousand but on a german equipment you’d be like “only 500 were made”… however this is only an assumption.
I don’t…?
What are you accusing me of…? Speak plainly.
let’s not be dense… what is something that is effectively a nerf and mechanical change to something people are “owners” of that you are in support of? I saw the wording you used for that and just sounded soooo ironic.
However when you take the context into consideration it’s not so much of a gotcha moment… and i’m not so sure on your exact stance on the issue… more so really just a retaliatory action which is not the proper behavior to have.
And since i value respect what i was accusing you of is using logic to benefit you but to go against others… that statement i originally highlighted basically is exactly that… however not with the context
Such a large post and again a perpetrator of making low effort comments on my break i was just clicking expand while browsing and went “excuse me?”
Just say it out loud, because I still don’t know.
Is it about body armour…?
You don’t have to be an A hole.
I still don’t get your point, and you seem to just be poisoning the well.
@Forum-Moderator Could any one of you just delete all interractions between the two of us on this topic…? It’s not constructive in any way (on purpose too, apparently), and is thoroughly off-topic. Including this reply as well, naturally.
If you need said replies specified:
Mounted for War - APC III Squads - #12 by B2_In_Iran
Mounted for War - APC III Squads - #13 by OggeKing
Mounted for War - APC III Squads - #21 by B2_In_Iran
Mounted for War - APC III Squads - #22 by OggeKing
Mounted for War - APC III Squads - #23 by B2_In_Iran
Mounted for War - APC III Squads - #24 by OggeKing
Mounted for War - APC III Squads - #25 by B2_In_Iran
And this one, and any future ones.
Okay. Derailment and/or trolling won’t be tolerated.
Either keep the thread on-topic and the conversation civil and respectful, or the gag hammer will be deployed. No further warnings. Let’s not do this nonsense.
If you have nothing constructive to add to the suggestion, wind your neck in and don’t say anything. Simply move on with your life, breathe easy, and be happy.
1 Like
ur claim of them not being infantry transports, because that is exactly what they were, AND
that’s true
Yeah it’s not bad… but… the Universal Carrier is an Armored Personnel Carrier. It’s meant to move Infantry personnel… in the end it’s an APC, so as an APC Squad it is
the Rider Squads have Motorbikes, difference being light utility vehicles, meant for rapid transport, with only Crew, not extra seats, nor are they armored.
You see? regarding Universal Carriers, they are fine as APC Squad as it is.
yeah around 500 converted all in all in the end.
but at any given time, you didn not have that many.
That’s all
this can be said with all equipment they hand us for our factions, Not sure how a heavily armored Tank for an APC gives parity with the other factions, when they don’t have anything like it.
let’s say liek this, WHEN they finally give us UK and Italy as standalone Factions (can’t wait)
THEN we can give them A Priest kangaroo perhaps as an Event vehicle to give them somethign unique…
until then I’m not too sure about any type of Kangaroo in-game currently
I still think you’re leaving out the most important aspect of actual APCs, and that is the transport of actual battle-ready squads. An APCs role is to transport such squads safely into battle, deploy said troops, and possiblybstick around after to provide supporting fire. On a real level, UCs transported select people, like messengers, specialists, officers, or wounded, in, out, and around a battlefield, but not mechanised infantry.
When people talk about APCs, that size factor does come into play. After all, no one would call a Humvee an “APC”, even though they do carry infantry, and are (or can be) armoured.
Again, it’s much more correct to call it a armoured utility vehicle, than an APCs… indeed, it’s intended role is actually to move infantry sections into battle, it’s all of the above that I mentioned, that’sbwhat theybwere built and used for.
Hold your horses, dear boy, that’s why I called them “the next step” and “the evolution of”, after all, Rider IIs will be a upgrade of the original concept, just as APC III aims to be an upgrade of the trucks.
I’m not the first one to talk of the idea of Rider II squads, you’ll see what that vision soon. Because yes, they will be armed and\or armoured, in the upgraded form…
Notice how before that I specified tech tree, and that I have also previously specified that all Kangaroo APCs would be Event and Premium content…?
Fret not, my vision is that the M5 would be the tech tree Commonwealth APC, as that is what makes the most sense.
Naturally, for people who prefer to be wrong ( 
), the current UC “APC” clown cars will remain unaltered, as an option for variaty. When I drop my Rider II suggestion, the Commonwealth tech tree equivelant will be represented by a UC in that role.
i think this requires its own post - this looks like u have put a lot of research into it
1 Like
The hope is, once this squad type is adopted, with a few tech tree examples and a couple premiums along the way, then the framework exists for other people to make further suggestions built upon it.
Currently, the devs have very little incentive to expand upon the current “APC” selection, as no one is interested in buying seventy-eleven Premium squads of this nature. But, with a expanded content avenue for both tech tree and event inclusions, the fear that this type of vehicle would be “over-used” is greatly lessened.
1 Like
agree on this front 100%, I am waiting for the German premium APC to go on sale. Very annoying they locked the only good German APC behind a paywall, and £20 at that! I could get 3 pints for that
1 Like