Make tanks require a commander to operate

[Le_Chuck]

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

[dtacs]

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.

[Jarryd_455495]

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

[Kim Jong ill]

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.

[Bob_Marley]

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.

[badmojo420]

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.

[Solid Knight]

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.

[badmojo420]

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?

[DankE_SPB]

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

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

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

[=Toasted=]

In other words, change nothing?

I think he is saying the driver would operate the CROWS as well as driving.

[badmojo420]

"hopefully"
with that you have even more possibilities to arguements

Well no matter what they do, there will still be people insisting on barking orders from the gunners seat. People are hardcoded that way. But at least there would be a defined commander position with little to do but observe and direct the tank.

[Solid Knight]

I think he is saying the driver would operate the CROWS as well as driving.

^ This.

We could also merge the driver and gunner position as it would free up people to be used in other roles such as infantry.

[badmojo420]

Okay, but how would we prevent the 1 manned armored 50cal of death?

[Solid Knight]

Okay, but how would we prevent the 1 manned armored 50cal of death?

Require a gunner or change the script to disallow shooting.

[Redamare]

if anything just who ever is gunner can operate inside turrets .... i dont like the idea only commander or SL can operate it

[Hunt3r]

Can we just have the .50 cal up top be enclosed? Let's just say it's an M1A2 TUSK, and they're using the 50 cal from a CROWs system. Just borrow the Stryker's gunner HUD for now, until you can actually get it done.

It's really annoying to deal with the fact that it's so easy to shoot someone out of the gunner position.

[USMCMIDN]

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.

The USMC does not use TUSK so Fallujah cannot have it. Also some map modeled after past battles cannot have it because TUSK was made later in the War In Iraq...

[TH3_BL4CK]

Instead of having a commander, gunner turret should be controled by the W,A,S,D keys just the like the Militia/Russian Anti Tank Guns.

Would stop the Apache Sniping + the spin the turret 720 degrees with one mouse movement.

[Startrekern]

Abrams tanks have tank commanders who coordinate with other assets on the battlefield, acquire targets for the gunner, and have all the communications, mapping, electronics systems etc. in there with them. I'm fairly sure the .50 hatch can be opened by the commander and he can stand up and get on it, and that it's not a separate position from the commanders' position.

Tank com's position could have CITV, IR (when/if that's implemented), access to a SL-radio-commrose similar thing, maybe target designation for the gunner (simulated with move markers), and of course CROWS.

[Solid Knight]

Merge driver and gunner. It puts more infantry on the field. Players can play the role of the tank rather than the role of the guy in the tank.