In any event, IFVs are the future not the past. It's the tank that is having issues at the moment.
Anyway, everything is fine, including all the other standard Land Component functions--long range precision fires, individual lethality, vtol, etc.
Cool things to watch for-- driver auto-pilot, smaller crews (2) carrying more pax, more modular for upgrades and maintenance, more speed and agility, hybrid-electric, drone launchers, less armor(?), stealth smoke (like the old sea destroyers), a remote control mode (like from a nearby bunker, etc.), moar guided missiles!, and moar guided missiles! Be prepared for direct versus indirect fire to become more blurred---off-board sensors.
The "Add a gun to the apc" made me laugh. Well, sure. That works. Or maybe, add transport infantry to a tank too.
I'm teasing, but think about the Marder for example. It's an APC with direct fire weapons to fight other vehicles. Sooo it's an IFV, and not an APC.
You could call it an APC, but you would be wrong.
Also, keep in mind the mission role matters.
IFV or not an IFV? Is it a truck with armor?
I'm joking some here, but seriously, if it were only me making a game, I would have thrown out all the legacy WW2 trash. Models would be whatever a player wanted to make based on a very few generic types. Player selected names, little counter art, and categories for data grids, etc. with an OOB system that was vastly more customizable. The limited, preconceived notions surrounding both models and OOB are a hinderance, not a help.
< Message edited by Malevolence -- 7/18/2020 8:31:37 AM >
Nicht kleckern, sondern klotzen!
*Please remember all posts are made by a malevolent, autocratic despot whose rule is marked by unjust severity and arbitrary behavior. Your experiences may vary.