Future Combat System M12xx Missing in US OOB?

[Akmatov]

Trolling through the US OOB I'm finding the M11xx Stryker vehicles, but none of the proposed Future Combat System M12xx vehicles. Given that they are the vehicles proposed for the future, I'm surprised they are missing. Am I just not finding them?

thanks

[DRG]

We pulled out all kinds of things that had been put in that OOB that had been "proposed" then died in development so right now when the final anouncement is made that "M12xx Stryker vehicles" are going to be issued to the troops THEN I'll put them in the OOB becasue it's now getting old putting things in then pulling them out again 3 years later when the project is cancelled

Don

[Akmatov]

I can sure understand that. The way things are going these day your OOB issues might get real easy - rifles, machine guns and hummers only.

But given that they were pulled out, I guess they were in at one time? I'm guessing I could find them in one of the pre-4.5 patches? Guessing I could load a copy of SPMBT and patch it up to the relevant patch and extract the OOB? If so, do you happen to know which patch I should check?

Thanks

[DRG]

There were no "M12xx Stryker vehicles" in previous patches

Don

[Marcello]

Originally Posted by Akmatov

Trolling through the US OOB I'm finding the M11xx Stryker vehicles, but none of the proposed Future Combat System M12xx vehicles. Given that they are the vehicles proposed for the future, I'm surprised they are missing. Am I just not finding them?

thanks

The FCS chance of getting axed is too high to make developing the icons etc a worthwhile investment of time for the staff.
Besides its purported capabilities are not handled well by the game engine anyway. Even if it is not canned timeline wise it will probably just barely fit within the game, if that.

I can sure understand that. The way things are going these day your OOB issues might get real easy - rifles, machine guns and hummers only.

I would not be so dramatic.The various Abrams/Bradley/Paladin etc. are going to stay, possibly with incremental upgrades.
The remaining M113s may be replaced by a combination of Stryker/Bradley/others variants (for logistical reasons).
The US Army will never become a light mechanized infantry only, because the need for tanks has been demonstrated repeatedly in the recent years.

[EJ]

DON OR ANDY,
What influences whether or not you allow prototype vehicles for some oobs? I've played as China in MBT and used prototypes. I've also played GB in SPWW2 and done the same. I'm surprised there aren't more.....It adds just a little more interest to an already GREAT GAME.

[hoplitis]

Mmm ... "over populated" OOBs?

[Marcello]

Originally Posted by EJ

DON OR ANDY,
What influences whether or not you allow prototype vehicles for some oobs? I've played as China in MBT and used prototypes. I've also played GB in SPWW2 and done the same. I'm surprised there aren't more.....It adds just a little more interest to an already GREAT GAME.

Open the US and the iraqi OOB with Mobhack and you will quickly see the answer. The US OOB is already nearly filled to max capacity. Adding prototypes will eliminate what little growth space is left. The iraqi one still has some space left so the odd, never mass produced, T-55QM2 is not a problem. Further Iraq has developed only an handful of prototypes. The US in the
1946-2009 timeframe has created God only knows how many Cheyenne/MBT-70/SgtYork/whatever.

[Suhiir]

Originally Posted by EJ

DON OR ANDY,
What influences whether or not you allow prototype vehicles for some oobs? I've played as China in MBT and used prototypes. I've also played GB in SPWW2 and done the same. I'm surprised there aren't more.....It adds just a little more interest to an already GREAT GAME.

Not just OOB space tho.
Most prototypes tend to have near magical capabilities in terms of offensive and defensive effectiveness...if Andy and Don allowed developer/manufacturer capability claims to sneak into the OOB all ATGMs would hit 99.9% of the time under any circumstances, all aircraft would have pin-point accuracy, all tanks would be invulnerable, etc.
So until they can get some accurate, realistic data there's really no sense adding drawing board stuff to OOBs.

Also since the vast majority of that stuff (particularly in the US OOBs) never gets deployed they'd be constantly adding and removing stuff in the OOBs and any scenarios using the stuff would become unplayable.

[EJ]

Marcello and Suhiir,
Thanks for sharing your knowledge in answer to my question....