Mixing & matching APCs
 

Is it done? Some OOBs come with a couple of types in the formation German Marder & Marder+ for example but what about other countries Russia with its variety being a prime example.
Take Russia choose your taxi type BTR BMP or MT-L & keep it in the family so would not apply to most OOBs. Would it now be reasonable to have a couple of types in one Mech Co maybe a 3rd for support elements.
Example using BTRs buying as much to win as anything.
2/3rds 70 or 80s with low penetration gun (+ with GL prefered;))
1/3rd 70M or 80As with high penetration gun or even 90- as TI so can lead the way & see whats happening once the dust flies in a fight. What you buy is dictated by opponents taxis as in can you kill it.
Support elements like MGs GLs ATGMs MANPADS could have basic 70, 80 or even 90 though thats a plush ride for them I feel. The rational is its support so stands back therefore the improved fire control keeps it effective & the ATGM covers any surprises.
Same can be done pretty much for BMPs & MT-Ls which makes me think they may mix them a bit.
However I personaly loath AFVs with ATGMs tacked on why not drop him off & resume taxi service? Its nothing to do with cost more the headache of deciding what hes going to be weapon platform or taxi, have found they are quite effective running support around though. A combo of 2 support units & the APC is a good amount of firepower in 1 hex against multiple threats, just dont stay long.
The thing is though is this just a force to win with or does it happen will they field a mix admitedly probably with more ATGM equiped vehicles?

Re: Mixing & matching APCs
 

I guess it depends on your overall strategy and opponents. Can the enemy hit and destroy your more expensive IFV from a large distance and with great efficiency an rate? Do you prefer to have your APCs/IFVs be able to destroy anything larger than the basic APC? It looks like you have answered yourself. If you don't like IFV that can carry ATGMs (I assume typing AFVs is a typo on your behalf), then you might as well go for the cheaper solution and invest the money on other type of units, better infantry or tanks etc.
I like and prefer to use expensive IFVs, but that is not always the best solution. Some times it is better to use a large number of cheap APCs with only a small percentage of IFVs that are used as a backup or there to provide extra attack support if the opportunity arise.
One of my personal favourite units is the BMP-1. Even on it's basic configuration it has good enough Vision, firepower to kill even an enemy tank (but mostly luck against MBT) and better firepower than most Western tanks up to the late 70s-80s. Very good firepower against infantry and against all (or 99.9%) enemy APCs and IFVs.

Re: Mixing & matching APCs
 

For the most part (due to maintenance/logistic reasons) the military tends not to mix vehicle types in smaller (i.e. platoon and company level) formations. This is not to say it's not done, just rather uncommon (such as the formations Imp pointed out).

In game - do as you like via the editor !

Re: Mixing & matching APCs
 

Generally yes, for logistical reasons, however if I recall corrrectly BMP-1 and BMP-2 were initially mixed; their armaments were sort of complementary and were not too different in terms of spare parts, mobility etc. Same probably apply to some BTRs, I would expect the autocannon armed ones being parceled out as fire support vehicles; again spare parts and mobility would not be too different.

Re: Mixing & matching APCs
 

Cheers Marcello think the example was overstating but for front line units will tend to have 2 APC types, same family not mixing BTRs & BMPs but pick 2 with diffrent armament. Still think the majority would be one type with a few "specialist" types in the mix.

Re: Mixing & matching APCs
 

"However I personally loath AFVs with ATGMs tacked on"

Agree. I never know what to do with my Bradleys.

Are they long range support or battle taxi? It makes my head hurt thinking about the paradox of a IFV equipped with advanced missile technology :confused: , maybe its just me. :)

Re: Mixing & matching APCs
 

At range, you kill enemy armor, then you close in and unload to clear the mess

Re: Mixing & matching APCs
 

If the IFV is in overwatch mode then its not doing its job of dismounted infantry support, at long range the infantry squad cannot reply to the enemy, if the mech squad cannot fire back then you dismounted too soon.

I don't have much expierence with IFV because I don't like them. So I could be wrong.

I'm a boots and tank man, I don't even use SP-arty if I can help it!

Thats why I like medium maps, the smaller size allows me to make good use of foot soldiers with tank support.

Re: Mixing & matching APCs
 

The good thing about IFVs is they can travel over land. Which means you can unload your troops and them move them to a good position for their anti tank capabilities.
But do not treat them as tanks, they will fail.

I prefer to use them as APCs, only that I know they have a much better chance of defending themselves from a tank than almost any APC every could.

Re: Mixing & matching APCs
 

I rather keep my bradleys away from enemy, they're too expensive

Re: Mixing & matching APCs
 

I use APCs and IFVs as a way to get my infantry to where they need to be and to support said infantry when the going gets tough. Bradelyes are great for dropping off the infantry in a place where they can intercept the enemy's infantry and tanks then pull the IFVs back to provide overwatch on the flanks. Since infantry can't move very fast suprise is the deadliest thing to them. The Bradley's can watch out for fast moving threats and deal with them, or at least butten them up until the troops can be removed. Also, APC are great for mixing up with your troops to provide additional fire support and protection. It always seems that a rifle squad that has a APC in the hex with it takes less damage from small arms and mmgs than one without. Yes, you do get into suppression issues and have to watch out for RPGs, but if you mix three APCs in with infantry on an ambush, it takes the enemy a while to put themselves back in fighting order. For the record, IFVs are not worth risking in this tactic. I like the standarded MMGs armed APCs and AGL hummers for this.

I learned one other trick with APCS when it was used against me. The emnemy throughly supressed my troops with APC, MMG, small arms and tank fire (he could have dropped mortars on me as well, can't remember) and than had a couple of loaded APCs drive right up to my troops, unload and the forthcoming rifle squad proceeded to cut into my troops with a vengence. This tactic obviously requires heavy suppression, good intel and an element of risk, but it was very effective. It is an effective way to break a line after continued bombardment. It also enables you to "breakthrough" the line with your secondary elements.

To return to the original idea, I like to mix up my units by simly buying APCs seperate. My last battle had M1A113s and AGL armed hummers, the hummers carriering the support elements and scouts in the company. It worked well and wasn't too expensive.

Re: Mixing & matching APCs
 

You can Buy A simple troop carrier, and a vehicle with a gun/MG/missle/whatever, something like 1 support vehicle per platoon(like german WW2 pzgren)

Re: Mixing & matching APCs
 

And that to me is the simle dare I say logical way, transport APCs & 2 to 4 tanks or dedicated ATGMs doing overwatch. If the transport can kill enemy transport thats great as it saves your covering vehicles having to deal with them.
As a note this games routines are very good just played on Russian Steepes as in not a lot of cover which highlighted them. My armour only engaged enemy armour totaly ignoring APCs which only seem to be engaged around the 500m mark, good threat deduction using standard routines op filter only realy needed for close up work to make them pick targets as everythings dangerous.

Re: Mixing & matching APCs
 

While that's not all too realistic at company level, but done in some armies, I tend to create mixed companies on a regular basis - I mostly play with force sizes of a battalion at maximum so it's pretty unbalanced to do otherwise. When I am playing a brigade-level battle, then, of course, I'd say this is quite unnecessary.

I usually have like 1-2 high-end platoons and maybe an engineer platoon on cheaper APCs in support. But I'd keep it somewhat realistic usually - like, not mixing tracked + wheeled vehicles, or worse, like attaching a para platoon on some BTRs to a BMP company... that sort of thing is not what I'd normally do ;-) - at least not in a PBEM where realistic force mix is usually part of the agreement.

I only do this mixing with the infantry though, I don't think it makes much sense with tanks.

If you're familiar with the Cold War Mod, there's even a mixed BMP-2 + -3 platoon formation included for the Russian OOB, which consists of 2 BMP-2s (advanced versions - much more heavily armored than early BMPs AND BMP-3s) and one BMP-3(great firepower but not so great potection, as we know it).
This actually makes sense tactically (though not logistically of course :doh:), as the heavily-armed BMP-3s are intended to provide long-range firepower, and Infantry sections also vary, the BMP-3 section having the support weapons while the BMP-2 sections are lightly equipped for close combat.