Fourth Position for MBT's

[Qaiex]

I approve of it aswell, tanks enjoy to slide around, it makes the gunner's job a hassle.

[Hitman.2.5]

Wow. This is a great idea. Though it would also mean that you can fit 4 people into a tank. Not sure if that's realistic.

Tanks generally have more than three crew members 4-5 I think, apc's however...

and to nick20404 more people in the tank less tanks available?

[AnRK]

That kinda ruins the chance of having any proper combined arms maps though, if there are much fewer tanks then aircraft become pointless.

[G.Drew]

I could swear this has been suggested at least twice...

[AnRK]

This is purely for the purposes of cutting engine noise though, has gone a tad off topic...

[Ragni<RangersPL>]

I could swear this has been suggested at least twice...

Yes, It has been already suggested

[StuTika]

What's this about stopping sliding?

[Psyko]

could we get a moderator to meld this thread with the old thread pl0x?

this suggestion is worth talking out imo...

[McBumLuv]

That kinda ruins the chance of having any proper combined arms maps though, if there are much fewer tanks then aircraft become pointless.

Well, as I've said before, there aren't necessarily going to be fewer tanks. If anything, it'll mean that you'll get fewer instances of every asset being used and seeing the entire team at main base (which happens quite a bit).

Also, you're not requiring the third player to actually sit in it. It's more like when you could have the engineer in the .05 cal. He'd give you a pretty big advantage (through repairs AND extra eyes), but there wasn't any apparent lack of players/tanks on the field, and the advantage wasn't so monstrous that it wouldn't have been possible to play without one.

That's how I envision it. I mean hey, even if we do it one build just to try it out, and people do complain about it and we revert back to it, at least it won't be something ridiculously detremental to the game like the deivation of 0.8 or the ability to survive bullet wounds in the head 100 % of the time.

EDIT: Yea, it's gone a bit off-topic, but I'd like to continue this discussion, either in a new thread or by using this thread. I'm against the position whose sole purpose is to "cut the engines", as that in itself is very unrealistic. Would it even be possible to move the turret without the engines on? Or what is the turret powered by?

[StuTika]

Hydraulics isn't it? If so, the engine would need to be running for the turret to work.

Can you explain the sliding thing?

Stu.

[McBumLuv]

Hydraulics isn't it? If so, the engine would need to be running for the turret to work.

Can you explain the sliding thing?

Stu.

Yea, exactly. The turret shouldn't even work without the engine being on.

And the sliding thing is that tanks seem to like to slide around when on a slant, though I don't know if hoping out of the drivers seat does anything to stop it, making the other point of the OP suggestion possibly useless.