Tank crewing and dieing -1 reply

Please wait...

Jetro

There's a satchel on your tank

50 XP

6th December 2004

0 Uploads

1,473 Posts

0 Threads

#1 13 years ago

Since tanks usually had a crew of 5 or so, it would kind of be cool if FH2 could find a way to represent this, even if it's only one player per tank like things are now.

The tank commander was considered the eyes and brain of a tank. I was recently watching a history channel show interviewing a sherman veteran that was describing how commanders usually did their job. Most commanders would motor around with their heads out the hatches. When combat was too heavy, they would close the hatch down to a crack and when things just got too rediculous would close the hatch completly to use the less than adequate periscope.

What if this were represented in FH2 tanks? A player could freely switch between crewmembers in a vehicle and the performance of a vehicle could be effected if by some chance a crewmember dies. If the commander was nailed while the player had him scanning the area, he would loose the generous commander veiw out the hatch and have to rely on the periscope for outside viewing. If an AT rifle round penetrated the turret and killed the gunner or loader, the tank would fire slower, and killing either the driver and gunner would immobolize the tank, ect.

Perhaps killing the "player" would required that the vehicle either catastrophically destruct or that all the "crew members" die. I know their are alot of tankers that don't want to see the gunner and driver posistion spilt, but it would be interesting to be driving along then hear an AT rifle round nail your gunner and loader. Then you suddenly realize you can't fire your main gun anymore and have to retreat. Or that you're restricted to a crappy view because you though it was safe for your commander when it really wasn't.:eek:




foodmaniac2003

Gelato pwns all

50 XP

11th March 2006

0 Uploads

2,875 Posts

0 Threads

#2 13 years ago

is that show about the 3rd armored spearheading? cause i just watched that recently too. your idea sounds awsome though but do you mean you could switch between different jobs on a tank? would the other jobs be AI controlled?




Strumtrupp

FH:STURMTRUPP4|BF2:HG_The Tank

50 XP

2nd January 2005

0 Uploads

679 Posts

0 Threads

#3 13 years ago

That would be something to concider. IIRC RO has something like that. It would also be more true to home as (have zero idea if true) I doubt a faust or whatever would destroy the entire tank or even if a direct hit would do that much.

Most damage probably just conviced the crew it was time to look for some new wheels. Though I have seen some pics of destroyed tanks and they got hit like by a wespe and no one survived.




Jetro

There's a satchel on your tank

50 XP

6th December 2004

0 Uploads

1,473 Posts

0 Threads

#4 13 years ago

I was think along the lines of a T-72 tank sim I player once. Though it's made apparent you are with 5 other people, the player can seize control of any crew member at anytime personnally. I think their would be some automatic stuff though, like a commander would retreat into the turret when the player wasn't using him so he couldn't get plugged while the player wasn't pay attention.

Since the hull MG is classically considered a 2nd player posistion, I suppose loosing him would only be possible if their was someone there. Or maybe the driver/hull mg could be rolled into one spot. The driver could control the gun too. But if one of those "crewmen" got plugged, the MG wouldn't work since the remaining member now has to focus on driving alone.

It would all be the player(no AI) so he would still make all the descisions and require all the skill. It would just make the importance of your gunner, driver, loader, commander, hull gunner much more apparent.

And yup it was the 3rd Armor spearhead thingy.:D

(edit) at Strumtrupp: Sorta like RO except the player model doesn't teleport around the tank. The driver is always in the driver posistion, the gunner is always in the gunner posistion, the loader is were he needs to be, ect. The player only switches between control of these groups.(Controls the Gunner/loader, Driver/Hull gunner, commander) So they can always be plugged in their respective places regardless of the players current focus.




foodmaniac2003

Gelato pwns all

50 XP

11th March 2006

0 Uploads

2,875 Posts

0 Threads

#5 13 years ago

so the way the tank moves and shoots is basically the same, but if your driver, gunner, or commander or etc. was shot, then you would lose certain benefits of having all those. is that what you mean? like if your commander was shot, then you can only see a limited amount of space. i support being able to switch crew members, and take their place like if your driver was shot, you could switch to being the driver and only be able to drive, not shoot, and your gunner could be AI controlled then? i think that maybe these "crew members" could suddenly "appear" as you enter the tank. myabe if someone wants to become the hull machine gunner, or man the machine gun on the top, then the "crew member" who was manning it could "dissapear", and be replaced by the real person, and when the real person left, the "crew member" would man the mg once again. i think the kills made by your "crew members" should go to you, right?




Jetro

There's a satchel on your tank

50 XP

6th December 2004

0 Uploads

1,473 Posts

0 Threads

#6 13 years ago

Well I'm not a real fan of an AI shooting posistions your not manning simply because there are plenty of times you see an enemy and don't want to shoot right at that moment.(like a sherman that's flanking) Also AI that's too good at shooting will be considered cheap, and AI that's too inaccuarate will be considered annoying and worthless.




UH60BHPilot

Pacific Campaign for the win.

50 XP

31st December 2004

0 Uploads

153 Posts

0 Threads

#7 13 years ago

No no no, icky icky icky. Why do I say that? Well, think of it this way; on a FULL server there is 32 people on a team, you say there should be about 5 positions per tank... that would drastically decrease infantry combat. foodmaniac, there is no logical way to do AI control of the other positions unless every server ran co-op but the bots wouldn't be limited to tanks so it would get ridiculous very quickly. FH has a perfect balance between as realistic as it can get with the player numbers given, and what real tanks needed.




Jetro

There's a satchel on your tank

50 XP

6th December 2004

0 Uploads

1,473 Posts

0 Threads

#8 13 years ago

I never said there should be 5 players per tank. You've misread the post.




Guest

I didn't make it!

0 XP

 
#9 13 years ago

I'm confused. Do you want to only be able to control a certain aspect of the tank(driving, gunning) at a time? Or do you want it so that you can control all aspects of your tank at once?




Jetro

There's a satchel on your tank

50 XP

6th December 2004

0 Uploads

1,473 Posts

0 Threads

#10 13 years ago

I heard the devs were experimenting with spliting tank control between the driver and gunner. So presumably a player would being switching between those two aspects already.

Eitherway it wouldn't really matter since even if tank aspects stay controled all at once by the player, he could suffer a decrease in abilities if a crewmember or two were to die. His driver and hull gunner die and suddenly he can't move or his tank is stuck in forward.

In a split system, he would suffer a decrease in ability that he'd notice when switching to another aspect.(He looses a loader so his main gun shoots slower for example) Or if both members were dead he couldn't switch to that posistion. But that's only if there were a split system.