Passengers on top of the turret of an MBT

Aljen · Post by **Aljen** » 2006-12-12 16:36

mammikoura wrote:I think he just wants to use the tank as a transport, which IMO is a very good idea. Gets you from place A to place B faster and the tank gets some infantry support when the fighting begins.

I agree completely and I would like to see this feature.

Lucid Nightmare · Post by **Lucid Nightmare** » 2006-12-12 20:32

Riding on a tank usually happens when not in a combat situation. Seeing as with PR, most maps you are already in the middle of combat, riding on a tank would be a dumb idea from an infantryman's perspective.

Valtasar · Post by **Valtasar** » 2006-12-12 21:39

Well not alweys in combat some times you have to get on the commbat area from base and that can be far avay (spaling sucks)

Darkpowder · Post by **Darkpowder** » 2006-12-13 11:31

still doesn't happen in modern warfare, so why bother with it. WW2 mod for BF2 yes... modern combat no.. doesn't happen.
would be more realistic modding the tea-boiler in a challenger tank, so the crew can get a brew even in NBC conditions

Mr_B.A.Baracus · Post by **Mr_B.A.Baracus** » 2006-12-13 13:33

Darkpowder wrote:still doesn't happen in modern warfare, so why bother with it. WW2 mod for BF2 yes... modern combat no.. doesn't happen.
would be more realistic modding the tea-boiler in a challenger tank, so the crew can get a brew even in NBC conditions

Yes but also in real life modern combat, troops dont spawn from the ether and have to run all the way to the front lines on their own. I think it would be a useful feature, if you don't like it, don't use it. It's all really a matter of if it can be done, and if so how long it would take. If it was a quick mod then I'd say it'd be worth it but if it's going to take a huge amount of time then there's more important things to do first.

$kelet0r · Post by **$kelet0r** » 2006-12-13 14:17

it's completely unrealistic so it should not even be considered

Post by **KingofCamelot** » 2006-12-13 21:50

Valtasar wrote:Well not alweys in combat some times you have to get on the commbat area from base and that can be far avay (spaling sucks)

While they could ride around on a tank to get to the combat zone, no tanker would let anyone ride on the outside of his tank while he is heading into a combat zone. The reason being if he gets engaged, or suddenly needs to engage the enemy, he has the problem of a couple guys sitting on the outside of his tank, and firing his weapon could be extremely damaging to them.

Basically, it'd be a stupid idea. You don't go into combat in a relaxed state, you need to go into combat as ready as possible to fight.

Leo · Post by **Leo** » 2006-12-13 21:54

Imagine your riding in the back of the tank, your talking with your buddy, the gunner sees two enemies, he shoots a round at the first one, your screen shakes and you start crying for your mommy because of the pain, the gunner turns to engage the other guy and hits you in the head with the turrent.

Bodybag2224 · Post by **Bodybag2224** » 2006-12-14 03:49

How bout an unarmoured troop transport. A big truck that can allow people to sit inside of it and get moved around, on large maps it would be quick and handy.

What we need is a link to the vehicles that the USMC and Army uses that way we can maybe add some new useful "unknown" vehicles.

ArneHn · Post by **ArneHn** » 2006-12-14 17:16

Bodybag2224 wrote:How bout an unarmoured troop transport. A big truck that can allow people to sit inside of it and get moved around, on large maps it would be quick and handy.

What we need is a link to the vehicles that the USMC and Army uses that way we can maybe add some new useful "unknown" vehicles.

Would come in handy!

jackal22 · Post by **jackal22** » 2006-12-14 18:14

yeh even if you sont add the extra seats for the tanks, i dont see why not, because its your fault if you die and it would just be used for lifts.

any waaaaay, usmc and the brits need a dam multi troops transport van, not another slow apc. something like the mec oen that can hold a load of people and get 2 squads from un-cap to flag 1 quick.

Cazboab · Post by **Cazboab** » 2006-12-14 19:08

The Vodnik and the Chinese flip bus hold the same number of troops as the humvee and Saracen that are already in.

Valtasar · Post by **Valtasar** » 2006-12-14 19:39

'[R-DEV wrote:KingofCamelot']While they could ride around on a tank to get to the combat zone, no tanker would let anyone ride on the outside of his tank while he is heading into a combat zone. The reason being if he gets engaged, or suddenly needs to engage the enemy, he has the problem of a couple guys sitting on the outside of his tank, and firing his weapon could be extremely damaging to them.

Basically, it'd be a stupid idea. You don't go into combat in a relaxed state, you need to go into combat as ready as possible to fight.

Ok not on tank. APC maybe?

Cazboab · Post by **Cazboab** » 2006-12-14 20:02

If you want to ride an APC why not go inside? Its kinda what they're meant for, and also the devs are adding more spaces to the inside.

Post by **Mongolian_dude** » 2006-12-14 20:40

What people are refering to is the Saxon(Big, green, metal, UK jeep, with an MG on top) when they say 'Not another Slow APC'.

There should be as many seats in the MBTs in PR as there is in RL. Some of these would include the reloader's seat (if there are still loaders in MBTs these days). He would just sit there, idle. He wont be able to do anything, but itas his choice to get in.(if you really want to go FAR with this, make a loader compulsay to reloading the Main Gun lol)

Theres a whole lot more things they need before any of that Jazz. A British MBT(challenger if thats what we still use these days?). Iv seen picks of an Appachie also. Is this realy true?

The Brits seems very 'under-viechled'. They have one.

...mongol...

Ninjo · Post by **Ninjo** » 2006-12-14 23:34

You can't sit on the back of an Abrams or any tank with a jet-style engine in it. The exhaust is too hot. Aside from that, doesn't happen much anymore in well trained armies. Maybe in like Balkans conflict some Serb tanks had people riding on them, but aside from that it just doesn't happen.

Post by **OkitaMakoto** » 2006-12-28 21:48

...hate tp bring up black hawk down (book and movie)... but on the way out, werent the rangers offered to ride on the roofs? yeah, IRL they chose to hoof it, but they had the option... just my 2 cents. i think it shoudl be in, want it? use it. dont want it? dont use it... if its easy to do of course... but it shouldnt be priority...

Post by **eggman** » 2006-12-28 22:56

just to confirm this 100% hehe....

we're not going to be adding this because:

1. it's not realistic
2. it has conflicts with some of the other changes we are making to tanks

Top_Cat_AxJnAt · Post by **Top_Cat_AxJnAt** » 2006-12-28 23:10

WEll said Eggman, but you DEVs are pushing PR closer and closer to real life combat and on maps that are barley 4m by 4m FORCING players to even stand near let along get in those uncovered deathtraps (jeeps - humvee, Vod ext.) is just aint moraly right!!

Just go on and push modeling of what is needed to correct this, slightly higher up your prioritory list and all your previous and possible future sins will be forgiven by the comunity as a whole.

Utter bs, but just come Egg, i know you care, we can see this from this superb and outstanding mod but can you just direct it (you love/care) towards new jeeps??

Blackhawk 5 · Post by **Blackhawk 5** » 2006-12-28 23:50

I dont like that idea, vehicles are bullet magnets as known. I was hoping for a 4 seater (2 up top + driver + gunner)

like shown here