Gunner/Driver seperate? -1 reply

Please wait...

raslin

I live on Gaming Forums

50 XP

8th February 2003

0 Uploads

1,062 Posts

0 Threads

#1 14 years ago

Now hold on. Read what I have to say first, please. Most people have the conception that if driver is seperated from the gunner, it will reak havoc on the game. Lets look at examples.

EOD. The APC's. the vietnamese APC has a seperate gunner from driver, and people use them quite well in conjunction. The american one not so much, but only because its an mg, not an anti-tank weapon.

BF. The wespe. it is not a turret, and requires tons of co-ordination between the driver and gunner to use well.

FH. I say that heavy tanks like the tiger, and later on, maybe KV-2's, King Tigers, etc etc, be made seperate. These tanks obliterate as they are, and they have full turnable turrets, so they only need the driver to work into position. Also, with their heavy armour, one man could use them, by driving into a defensive position, and getting in turret. This is just my view on seperation, as I dont think something like a sherman, which should be 4 to a tiger or so(ingame at least), shouldnt require 8 people just to take out a tiger...




Kämpfer

I take what n0e says way too seriously

50 XP

27th April 2003

0 Uploads

2,394 Posts

0 Threads

#2 14 years ago

Hmmm, no ^^




Beast of War

Born to kill

50 XP

28th May 2003

0 Uploads

2,698 Posts

0 Threads

#3 14 years ago

Would be realistic but players will hate it, this i ensure you.

Ever tried aiming a top turret mg on a turning/moving tank ? Thats what i mean......

When you just spot a threat and aim for it maybe the driver will go foreward or turn throwing you off aim killing the both of you. It is not a good plan for the majority of the players who play on pub servers and have no voice com. ( telling the driver what to do )

Then there is the question of unauthorised players jumping in when you for example use a tank as a hidden defensive AT weapon by yourself. (ambush) Wespe and Priest are especially plagued by this, they get stolen with you in it, and driven to your doom.

If there would be done anything, it should be make the artillery 1 man operating too. Using them as tanks will punish the driver real quick. The Wespe really should have a top mounted mg too, for close defense against infantry.




Archangel85

Customtitles rock!

50 XP

29th June 2003

0 Uploads

795 Posts

0 Threads

#4 14 years ago

if they would make the turret seperate from the body of the tank, it would work. But otherwise, no way.




raslin

I live on Gaming Forums

50 XP

8th February 2003

0 Uploads

1,062 Posts

0 Threads

#5 14 years ago

Arch, it would be.

Beast, did you read what I was saying? in EOd, take the vietnamese APC. Fully rotatable turret, people use the two very well together, or at least when I am one of the two they do. Dont say it wont work until youj try it... The wespe defidentally shouldnt not be 1 person. Then it would be used as a tank destroyer, which its not. Some people try to use it like that as is, but fail horribly, as they should.




Evilsanta

Swedish Elite Tanker

50 XP

12th August 2003

0 Uploads

435 Posts

0 Threads

#6 14 years ago

This would be nice just like in OFP, but is too advanced for the majority of smacktards(85 % of all players :) out there...




D-Fens

uwe bolltastic!

50 XP

2nd May 2003

0 Uploads

4,837 Posts

0 Threads

#7 14 years ago

Yeah but I that's so easy when your commander (I thought it was hard as gunner..), you just choose a target and the npc will hit it. Fun though.




bmargb

BF 1936 TEAM

50 XP

31st August 2003

0 Uploads

340 Posts

0 Threads

#8 14 years ago

Well I will put my 2 cents.

The tanks got a average of 3 (driver, gunner, commander-coaxialmg) to 6 crewmen (driver, codriver-internalmg, gunner, gunner assistant, commander-coaxialmg).

I think that FH should create 3 places for each tank (or 4 if its a heavytank). I explain: 1 place driver (can use the internal machinegun), 2 place gunner (can rotate the turrent and shoot the main gun&turretgun), 3 place commander (is the one of vanilla BF, the man who use the coaxial (or external) machinegun).

That's why all the positions will got their advantages and their disadvantages: - Driver: can move the tank and shoot the internal mg (protected by the armor) - Gunner: can move the turret and shoot the maingun and the turret machinegun. (protected by the armor) - Commander or external gunner. Can turn fast, can shoot the external/coaxial machinegun.

About tankdestroyers (StugIII or M10) should only got 2 places: the driver-maingun and the external gunner.

So each tank will need at least 2 people to be useful. That will emprove Teamplay and reduce the tankfear (cuz If you blow a tank you got 2 frags, not only one), the people will use the tanks carefuly.

Imagine if you kill a Tiger, you got at least 2 frags!!!!, or if there aren't two people in the tiger, it will be useless.

It will balance the game, and give a new interesting look, specially in tank battles (like kursk) or tank duels.

It should be fantastic, more teamplay, interesting battles, the best... only FH. Cuz tanks are very important in the team, and should be at least managed by 2 people.

A multiplayer version of the magnificient OFP tank system.




Evilsanta

Swedish Elite Tanker

50 XP

12th August 2003

0 Uploads

435 Posts

0 Threads

#9 14 years ago

Whats the FH-modteam take on this?? :dance:




judge reinhold

BOY I SURE POST ALOT

50 XP

27th April 2003

0 Uploads

2,112 Posts

0 Threads

#10 14 years ago

bmargbWell I will put my 2 cents.

The tanks got a average of 3 (driver, gunner, commander-coaxialmg) to 6 crewmen (driver, codriver-internalmg, gunner, gunner assistant, commander-coaxialmg).

I think that FH should create 3 places for each tank (or 4 if its a heavytank). I explain: 1 place driver (can use the internal machinegun), 2 place gunner (can rotate the turrent and shoot the main gun&turretgun), 3 place commander (is the one of vanilla BF, the man who use the coaxial (or external) machinegun).

That's why all the positions will got their advantages and their disadvantages: - Driver: can move the tank and shoot the internal mg (protected by the armor) - Gunner: can move the turret and shoot the maingun and the turret machinegun. (protected by the armor) - Commander or external gunner. Can turn fast, can shoot the external/coaxial machinegun.

About tankdestroyers (StugIII or M10) should only got 2 places: the driver-maingun and the external gunner.

So each tank will need at least 2 people to be useful. That will emprove Teamplay and reduce the tankfear (cuz If you blow a tank you got 2 frags, not only one), the people will use the tanks carefuly.

Imagine if you kill a Tiger, you got at least 2 frags!!!!, or if there aren't two people in the tiger, it will be useless.

It will balance the game, and give a new interesting look, specially in tank battles (like kursk) or tank duels.

It should be fantastic, more teamplay, interesting battles, the best... only FH. Cuz tanks are very important in the team, and should be at least managed by 2 people.

A multiplayer version of the magnificient OFP tank system.

in a perfect world, your idea would work. however, it will be a disaster and will make fh a joke.