Crewed tanks should have a HUGE advantage

  • Please make sure you are familiar with the forum rules. You can find them here: https://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/index.php?threads/forum-rules.2334636/

Markov

FNG / Fresh Meat
I think what really needs to be done is an actual realtime transition between spots. That also includes exiting the vehicle. I'm tired of seeing people bail out right before they get blown up or other people just popping out of APCs to blow you up with a satchel or panzerfaust from a driveby.
 

Theodrake

FNG / Fresh Meat
Mar 21, 2006
404
0
0
BobCobb said:
However a 3-manned crew of vets will stomp single crewed vets, and easily stomp a 3-manned crew of noobs. Simply put, its all about the quality of the player, which is a large reason why people solo tank. They are simply more effective without a crap driver.

I don't believe this at all. A 3-manned crew of vets against three single crewed vets tanks will generally lose. The three tanks will be able to either get 3:1 shots ratio. Or better yet. One tank can angle and hull down against the 3-man while his 2 buddies manuver into a kill position.

But a 2-man tiger/IS-2 can hold off a lot of badly crewed tanks better then a 1-man show.
 

Pz502_Sith

FNG / Fresh Meat
Mar 15, 2006
10
0
0
Don't forget the other reason to single-double man tanks. Less loss of life when they die.

Say a fully manned tanks is attacked by three singles. Most likely the full tank is going up before it kills one of the others. That results in 3 deaths. Even if the full tank gets one, its still a 3:1 loss for reinforcments.
 

Amarok

FNG / Fresh Meat
Apr 11, 2006
114
0
0
58
Costa Blanca, Spain
And what about make it impossible to manage a tank without at least 2 people, while treating the kills as "1" concerning reinforcements? I know some(most:D )times it's utter bullshit to "share" a tank with one or two Rambo-like-clo(w)ns(where Rambo=brainless:D )... on the other hand I can imagine not all the soldiers were by far profs, so we face somehow the reality as well (hm... while I'm writing I realize it's kind of bullshit... not even the german "last choice" let peeps without skills in a tank...)

Background: lend back, crack open your preferred beer and try to figure out how the **** would you manage to use a tank alone... much better if you ever seen one from inside (not to talk about WWII tanks...) ...that much for realism:rolleyes:
 

AGTMADCAT

FNG / Fresh Meat
Apr 12, 2006
82
0
0
I think if we just outlaw n00bs then the benifits of a multi-crewed tank will become manifest. I have a friend who's a good driver, and I consider myself a good gunner (I can even make the odd shot shile moving if I'm on flat ground, a real plus when you've got a driver who understands "DON'T TURN"), and if we're sitting next to each other or making prolific use of VOIP, we make a killer combination. Then when we get our third as an MG, we're unstoppable. :D
 

GonzoX

FNG / Fresh Meat
Feb 6, 2006
708
0
0
home.roadrunner.com
Tak said:
Too much of a PITA for legit players, though.


As has been said, the plague that is known as Solo Tanking will go 'poof' when they implement the full animation sequences and times for position swapping/exits :)

I don't think they will do that. They may simply make tanks operable by one person and then add more tanks to the tank maps. That would be better IMHO.

Where are you getting this info about swapping time from? I don't see it anywhere.
 

GonzoX

FNG / Fresh Meat
Feb 6, 2006
708
0
0
home.roadrunner.com
Varsity said:
One thing I'd like to see is a 'need gunner' or 'need driver' prompt, similar to the current 'need ammo' on MG players.

This is what I have talked about in another thread.

Give the "We love teamwork" guys the option of advertising that they want a crew and give the "I work better in a tank alone" guys the option to lock the tank at startup automatically and advertise to others that the tank is locked so they don't look to that tank as open seating. This would eliminate the "get out of my tank" arguments.

This would give both camps what they want and eliminated the arguing over tanks once and for all. Whearas the seat wait time thing would just make things worse for everyone.

My solution is simply the best as it would give both parties what they want and you can configure your own setting via an ini file edit or similar.
 

GonzoX

FNG / Fresh Meat
Feb 6, 2006
708
0
0
home.roadrunner.com
Pz502_Sith said:
Don't forget the other reason to single-double man tanks. Less loss of life when they die.

Say a fully manned tanks is attacked by three singles. Most likely the full tank is going up before it kills one of the others. That results in 3 deaths. Even if the full tank gets one, its still a 3:1 loss for reinforcments.

Yeah, people seem to be forgetting this.

Six people per team would equal either

3 full manned tanks or

6 single manned tanks. Who would win?

Count that 6 tanks can cover more area and cap more objectives concurrently and as you stated, 1 tank kill of a full crew tank = 3 dead guys vs 1 dead team mate.

The math should be easy to understand which is why I am puzzled when I see three people jump into one tank when there are six empty tanks available. Even more so when they jump into a tank that I am in. Luckily this rarely happens when enough tanks are available but it does happen from time to time.
 

Merlin

FNG / Fresh Meat
Apr 30, 2006
2
0
0
Australia
GonzoX said:
Yeah, people seem to be forgetting this.

Six people per team would equal either

3 full manned tanks or

6 single manned tanks. Who would win?

Count that 6 tanks can cover more area and cap more objectives concurrently and as you stated, 1 tank kill of a full crew tank = 3 dead guys vs 1 dead team mate.

The math should be easy to understand which is why I am puzzled when I see three people jump into one tank when there are six empty tanks available. Even more so when they jump into a tank that I am in. Luckily this rarely happens when enough tanks are available but it does happen from time to time.

Another reason I like the idea of eliminating solo manned tanks. It would solve this problem altogether. Besides, the solo tankers are already well catered for in games like 'battlefield 2'.

If you try to please everyone, no-one will like it.

I like the idea of a driver class and a gunner class. Maybe also allow the driver to fire the machine gun as well as drive the tank, making all tanks twin seaters only. I know that wouldn't be in keeping with the realism the game is striving for though.
 

Ron

FNG / Fresh Meat
Feb 9, 2006
910
0
0
Like others have said if the devs put a delay in switching positions or better yet animations then i think we'll start seeing crewed tanks dominate more simple as that, but then again they might want to do that because well of player limits, etc. At the moment an excellant but unrealistic tactic that is used is two or three solo tanks stick together and if one tank is destroyed the guy in that tank simply bails before the tank is destoyed and enters his friends tank, three times more effective then having a full crew in one tank.
 

MkH^

FNG / Fresh Meat
Mar 11, 2006
500
0
0
Finland
Merlin said:
Split the ‘tank crew’ class into two separate classes: ‘Tank Driver’ & ‘Tank Gunner’.
Drivers can only drive and gunners can only man the gun. No more soloing.
Not a bad idea. This might have some hilarious consequenses though. Can you imagine ten morons sitting in tanks in the main begging for someone to drive for them :D
 

MkH^

FNG / Fresh Meat
Mar 11, 2006
500
0
0
Finland
Harry S. Truman said:
Crewed tanks already have a huge advantage. As long as they know what they are doing.

But two single man tanks are still more powerful and no matter how good the one tank crew is, they are still undergunned.
 

Musketeer

FNG / Fresh Meat
Mar 21, 2006
389
0
0
Driver/Gunner classes would absolutely bite. You would wind up with a bunch of gunners running around looking for a tank with a driver.

Increase the time to board, exit and switch vehicle positions. Make it 10 seconds for each. Figure the guy is either getting into a locked up armored can or getting out, as well as connceting to the intercom and other essentials.

That will solve the solo tanker problem as the crewed tank will now have a serious advantage. To use it though the crewed tank MUST manuever effectively, forcing the static tank to either move or allow itself to be flanked.

Make this also apply to APC and Armored Car drivers/passengers. Finally institute damage similar to falling for leaving a moving vehicle. moderate speed results in broken legs, higher speed equals dead.

Suddenly the only problems I have will all evaporate.
 

Musketeer

FNG / Fresh Meat
Mar 21, 2006
389
0
0
MkH^ said:
But two single man tanks are still more powerful and no matter how good the one tank crew is, they are still undergunned.

No, I disagree. I have very often racked up an excellent fill/death ratio playing against superior numbers of enemy tanks with a crewed tank. Communication is the key. Those solo tanks are often solo because they DO NOT communicate to begin with. Often not engaging the racing group of solo tanks is the best bet. By manueverring you can take advantage of their lack of coordination. Start killing them off and more often than not they will not communicate their target or damage to others. If you have a SMART MG gunner he will NOT hose down everything causing all other tanks to follow the line of tracers to you. A smart crew will also NOT fight a tank to the death but will race it back to the spawn area and allow it to die in order to get a new one. Solos race out die and repeat, depleting reinforcements.

I will always take a equivalent tank with a good crew over two to one numbers of solo tanks operated by "solo minded" people.
 

AGTMADCAT

FNG / Fresh Meat
Apr 12, 2006
82
0
0
Musketeer said:
as well as connceting to the intercom[/quote]

HA! An intercom... in a tank... in the 1940s... heehee... you're funny. ^_^

You have a good point, though.