project reality header
Go Back   Project Reality Forums > PR:BF2 Mod Forums > PR:BF2 Suggestions
24 Oct 2014, 00:00:00 (PRT)
Register Forum RulesDeveloper Blogs Project Reality Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
PR:BF2 Suggestions Suggestions from our community members for PR:BF2. Read the stickies before posting.

Contact Support Team Frequently Asked Questions Register today!

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-09-2010, 06:21 AM   #1
Le_Chuck

Le_Chuck's Avatar
Default Make tanks require a commander to operate

Cant find anything similar, that had been brought up already, so...

What about to drop the loaders seat in a tank and replace it with a tank commanders position inside the tank. Commander can operate the .50 from inside like the Stryker view. Loaders position is way too exposed to nme small arms imo. Drivers 360 view could be removed then. You need 3 crewmen then to get a tank fully operational. Dont know if this is too much considering the 32 player limit per side but would be great and more realistic.



Thread title edited for descriptive purposes

-Bob


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 1 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 1 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 1 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Le_Chuck is offline
Last edited by [R-DEV]Bob_Marley; 03-09-2010 at 07:20 AM..
Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2010, 06:48 AM   #2
dtacs
Supporting Member

dtacs's Avatar
Default Re: Tank 3rd .50 cal position

This has been suggested LOTS of times.

It is not going to be done (another position) as it takes too many people off the field, like you said.

Not to say i don't agree with it however. It would be pretty coolies.
dtacs is offline Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2010, 07:02 AM   #3
Jarryd_455495

Jarryd_455495's Avatar
Send a message via MSN to Jarryd_455495
Default Re: Tank 3rd .50 cal position

Then why even have the extra position avalible now?

Not trying to sound disrespectful but i support this idea because if your gonna take out a tank then you need a proper weapon, instead of spraying it with bullets hoping to hit the tank commander for an easy kill (not to mention snipers trying to shoot him because it's 1337 kool.)

Sometimes you need a tank commander, ie: extra pair of eyes in urban combat

edit: opps, didn't see your second last sentence, sorry mate
Jarryd_455495 is offline Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2010, 07:07 AM   #4
Kim Jong ill

Kim Jong ill's Avatar
Default Re: Tank 3rd .50 cal position

In urban combat, especially insurgency, the extra gunner is invaluable for watching out for rear threats like bombcars and ambushing RPGers. At the very least I'd like to see TUSK and similar modelled on all tanks applicable in insurgency because it is such a valuable tool to the tanks security and survivability.
Kim Jong ill is offline Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2010, 07:18 AM   #5
[R-DEV]Bob_Marley
PR:BF2 Developer

[R-DEV]Bob_Marley's Avatar
Default Re: Tank 3rd .50 cal position

Adding CROWS (and the associated equivelents from various parts of the world) has been suggested several times before, as has a dedicated commander position rather than the 12.7mm gunner come commander thats present at the moment (its not a loader position and indeed some of the tanks in PR don't even have human loaders! ).

That being clear (and so not the topic of discussion - it is possible, may be implimented in the future, but requires additional work that may be better spent elsewhere in the short term.) the suggestion of upping the number of crew required for a tank to operate from 2 to 3 is (as far as I recall) new.

So the thread will remain open under that guise - adding a dedicated commander position within the tank with a 360 degree view and control of the topside machine gun with CROWS (or similar system as appropriate) that is required for the tank to operate while at the same time changing the driver view to one from the driver's actual position (and so restircted to a foreward view).

Its certainly an interesting idea - it promotes teamwork within the tank and is a more realistic representation of how tanks operate (or at least appears to be from my point of view - I've no first hand military experience). On the other hand, it may decreece tank effectiveness (as the driver needs the commander to give him direction when reversing) and tie up too many players in tanks to allow an infantry force to be fielded or have enough players to operate other assets.

The key to modernising any weapon is covering them in glue and tossing them in a barrel of M1913 rails until they look "Modern" enough.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 1 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Many thanks to [R-DEV]Adriaan for the sig!
[R-DEV]Bob_Marley is offline Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2010, 05:45 PM   #6
badmojo420
Supporting Member
Default Re: Make tanks require a commander to operate

I support this. Of course it will take another person from the infantry, but if we keep that in mind while creating map layouts, it shouldn't be a big issue. For example, reducing the number of tanks on maps like Kashan would be a good start.

Fewer tanks with more teamwork and sets of eyes seems better than lots of tanks with drivers & gunners trying to drive, spot enemies, set markers, and check the map for friendlies, etc. It's amazing how many times I've spotted targets in the 50cal with no zoom, just because I've got the ability to ignore everything else and just look around.

Also, it would hopefully define the roles of a tank crew better. The commander would be in charge, and the other two would be under his command. Right now, there is often confusion when strangers team up to crew a tank, some people think the driver should be giving the orders, others think the gunner.

Edit: But it would require a CROWS system(or inside seat) to be put on every tank. We can't force tank crews to take a commander if the commander can be killed with small arms.
badmojo420 is offline Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2010, 05:49 PM   #7
Solid Knight
Default Re: Make tanks require a commander to operate

I have a better solution. Combine the commander and driver position just as you've combined the gunner and loader position. That way, the tank is used to its full potential and everyone gets something fun to do.
Solid Knight is offline Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2010, 05:52 PM   #8
badmojo420
Supporting Member
Default Re: Make tanks require a commander to operate

Quote:
Originally Posted by Solid Knight View Post
I have a better solution. Combine the commander and driver position just as you've combined the gunner and loader position. That way, the tank is used to its full potential and everyone gets something fun to do.
In other words, change nothing?
badmojo420 is offline Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2010, 05:55 PM   #9
DankE_SPB
Retired PR Developer

DankE_SPB's Avatar
Send a message via MSN to DankE_SPB Send a message via Skype™ to DankE_SPB
Default Re: Make tanks require a commander to operate

my only concern with this idea is "require", the way its done with .50 now would be better imo- will make everybody happy
another note is additional work on making assets, but thats another topic
Quote:
Also, it would hopefully define the roles of a tank crew better. The commander would be in charge, and the other two would be under his command. Right now, there is often confusion when strangers team up to crew a tank, some people think the driver should be giving the orders, others think the gunner.
"hopefully"
with that you have even more possibilities to arguements

Quote:
I have a better solution. Combine the commander and driver position just as you've combined the gunner and loader position. That way, the tank is used to its full potential and everyone gets something fun to do.
its already combined since like 0.8(or even in earlier versions), the view from top of tank is closer to commander view from it, rather than driver, anyway since 0.9 there are 2 views for it, so it only lacks a .50 access


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 1 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[R-DEV]Z-trooper: you damn russian bear spy ;P - WWJND?
DankE_SPB is offline Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2010, 05:56 PM   #10
=Toasted=

=Toasted='s Avatar
Default Re: Make tanks require a commander to operate

Quote:
Originally Posted by badmojo420 View Post
In other words, change nothing?
I think he is saying the driver would operate the CROWS as well as driving.

Bob_Marley - "This is an outrage! If we're going to spend money on black projects they should be much more amusing and/or explosive than this."

PR In-Game Alias: =Epic-Toast=
=Toasted= is offline Reply With Quote
Reply


Tags
3rd, cal, commander, make, operate, position, require, tank, tanks
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:16 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin. ©vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.1
All Content Copyright ©2004 - 2014, Project Reality.