Why no tanks

Heydude235 · Post by **Heydude235** » 2006-01-01 10:09

I was playing prmm the past week and for some odd reasion the team seem to be talking to each other about what they can/cant use. This mod is about realisam and in real war armys dont say wait u cant use the tank so get out. Or they dont say o wait u cant shoot my from there thats a glitch! Or o wait i fell down let me get back up before we fight. Or let me reload first. We can use what ever we want. My point is if i use a tank when the teams have said no tanks they try to vote me out? Tanks make game play more fun it makes uses of the Anti-Tank class and the Engineer class. Most of the time its all medics and support maybe a sniper but thats it. Tanks our fun and it dose tank skill to drive one with out dieing. So i would love them in all the maps maybe not the urban ones tho

dawdler · Post by **dawdler** » 2006-01-01 10:54

The mod is about realism, but usually a US Marines invasion force doesnt consist of a single-crewed tank, 1 gung-ho assault soldier and a sniper that couldnt hit the broadside of a barn if his life depended on it.

When there are 5 players per team, you dont want a tank to come in and kill them all. Its alot more fun when its 5 vs 5 infantry combat. The tank adds little to the mix as when you die, you simply respawn as AT and take it out... And then you die from the enemy infantry and respawn as regular infantry to take them out. Its an annoyance basicly.

This has also been discussed at length in that other topic about disallowing vehicles on certain occations.

JasonH · Post by **JasonH** » 2006-01-01 11:03

Main reason why we (and I usually) request no tanks is when the server has just 10-15 people, haveing a tank throws everything off. And since everyone LOVES to play the god damn Glory hounds server there's upto 50 second spawn wait. Rather have a rocken firefight some shitty lopsided duel where everyone plays Anti-tank and goes for the tank and loses anyways.

Post by **Hitperson** » 2006-01-01 11:11

tanks are not suited for urban warfare it does not utilise them and it exposes their weeknesses i personally think that adding tanks was a mistake of EA's part especially the the middle easter levels wherew most are in cities.

Post by **Rhino** » 2006-01-01 13:54

in a 16man map eg, fushe pass, the tank and APC can push through killing everything in its path taking every point in under 10mins if you do it right.

2 rounds, each lasting under 10mins, who now that the only ppl with kills are the guys in the tank and APC now we can load next map and hope that we can just have a infantry battlel

FUN!

if its a 32man server with more than 3 or 4 points then yes, a tank can be used but on a 16man server its just really to much

Post by **BrokenArrow** » 2006-01-01 16:55

Heydude when everyone in a server has decided not to use tanks you probably shouldn't come rolling through with a tank. Yes this mod is about realism but it is also about fun. When a group of players decide not to use tanks and you come through with one, they can vote kick you because you are making their playing experience less fun.

Now if it was a map with say 10 people and say 6 of them wanted no tanks and the other 4 wanted them, thats a different story.

Of course, you are right in that real army's don't say 'you can't use that tank', but this is a game, realism mod or not.

Post by **Hitperson** » 2006-01-01 17:13

i have to admit if it is there i will use it but mostly for anti tank taking out foot solidiers is not fair so i dont do it unless they are a difinite threat.

Armand61685 · Post by **Armand61685** » 2006-01-01 21:58

The tank can easily be taken out with AT or mines; just be aware of your surroundings. I don't know why people complain so much. Plus I witnessed a lot of new players become turned off by this mod because people were cussing at them and telling them no tanks. This isn't america's army (but the infantry aspect of pr should be like AA). I understand that with 5v5 games tanks shouldn't be used, but when you get a full 32 player server, like we've had this week on GH, then no one should utter the words "no tank."

Lifetaker · Post by **Lifetaker** » 2006-01-02 05:20

'[R-PUB wrote:BrokenArrow'] Yes this mod is about realism but it is also about fun.

Exactly. Realism can only go so far in a video game. I mean in the real world, not just any soldier on the battlefield can grab a tank or a helicopter and go for glory. It requires specially trained teams to crew these vehicles. I do agree that if there's only a few guys playing, armor really kills the fun, and usually it's not an issue. If someone joins, hops in a tank, the few of us say "No armor". They may ask why not, someone types "too few people" or something and the new player says "Cool", but when you've got 20 to 30 players, armor adds a dynamic that is distinctly BF. It adds to the paranoia. Something else you've got to hide from, be aware of.

I also agree that this piddly arguing during the game is turning people off to the experience. If it's their first time playing and they want to try out the vehicles PRMM style, they shouldn't get screamed at for it. To the players that have such an issue with it, you got your Karkand with no vehicles whatsoever. Lord knows we play that map enough. I've been playing a couple of times when this childish arguing has made people leave the server. Hell, I've almost left because of it. Really, get over it. It's just a game. Play for fun. If you want real combat, join the military.

Trufret · Post by **Trufret** » 2006-01-02 17:36

they need to find a way to make it so tanks and APCs don't spawn until there are 20 people in a server. if you can't make them not spawn maybe make them not enterable. There will be no arguments it thier is no tank to argue about and no one will roll in with a tank when it's 5 vs 5

Maj.b00bz · Post by **Maj.b00bz** » 2006-01-02 22:33

'[R-PUB wrote:BrokenArrow']Heydude when everyone in a server has decided not to use tanks you probably shouldn't come rolling through with a tank. Yes this mod is about realism but it is also about fun. When a group of players decide not to use tanks and you come through with one, they can vote kick you because you are making their playing experience less fun.

Now if it was a map with say 10 people and say 6 of them wanted no tanks and the other 4 wanted them, thats a different story.

Of course, you are right in that real army's don't say 'you can't use that tank', but this is a game, realism mod or not.

Whoa!!!!

MajorB has a Major problem here. WTF is this Bullsheet?!? I just played tonight and for the first time ran up on this. Being gone for over a week on vacation I must have missed something. When did the players get the right to make up the rules as they go along? Then arbitrarily start kicking people because they aren't "playing along". I'm sorry but the game is what it is and until it's coded or mod-ed differently, vehicles, like 'em or not, are here to stay. Especially if it's not your freaking server. Even if it is your server it should be posted on the rules and comments that no armor is to be used. To have a member of the Dev team come out and condone this type of bullying behavior disappoints me.

This is complete BS PR and you need back away from supporting this. This mod need positive publicity not this ****. A new guy comes on and tries the game for the first time, then get collectively kicked because he didn't realize vehicles/armor, while available, are not allowed? That'll be the last time he/she plays this mod. Then the negative vibes start. "Don't play PR, the player base kicks you for no apparent reason", Nice.

Don't get me wrong, I agree that when there are only 5-10 people per side, armored vehicles suck and ruin the experience. Let the coders figure out a way to restrict their use. Players making up their own rules, no matter how "good intentioned" and then kicking to enforce them is wrong and will not bring in more players. Until then go recruit more people to up the numbers. Kicking people off the server is NOT, I repeat, NOT the way to promote this mod. This has go to stop or this mod is over before it really even starts.

beta · Post by **beta** » 2006-01-02 23:29

A simple way of of "restricting" armour's (and helos and jets and any vehicle for that matter) is to INCREASE the spawn time! Make the tank take 5 minutes to spawn back, so when you destroy it you don't have to worry about killing another one in 45 seconds ...

Post by **BrokenArrow** » 2006-01-03 00:12

I'm sorry Major, I was under the impression that if the people in the server could put together enough votes for a votekick then alot of them had agreed to not using armour. Also I was assuming the player in question would be told 'we aren't using armour'. I guess I should not assume these things.

I guess it is my opinion that when there is a server full of people who don't want armour to be used and one comes into a server and uses armour, disregarding the warnings and/or pleas by those already in that server not to use armour and using it anyway is ruining the fun of those in the server that apparently up until this point agreed to no tanks being used.

This is NOT a mod-wide rule, otherwise why bother modeling a Challenger? Also I suppose that arguably it IS the players present that make up the rules. This is not a case of a tyrranical admin booting people who aren't playing by his rules, I'm talking about player vote kicks. Which means enough people (after hopefully telling the player in question (otherwise, there shouldn't have been a kick)) disagreed with and disliked the way the player was acting/playing to feel it necessary for that person to be vote kicked.

If someone is being kicked, they need to be told why, only after disregarding the warnings blatently should they be kicked.

Noetheinner · Post by **Noetheinner** » 2006-01-03 00:32

and belive me, on Gloryhoundz they get a buttload of warnings.

Post by **JS.Fortnight.A** » 2006-01-03 01:08

Also just a note Major, [R-PUB] members are not mod developers. They are part of our team overall and are under some of the same guidelines that the devs follow, but they do not part take in the direct development of the mod. So for further reference, R-PUB does not equal R-DEV. They are different but have the same overall goal in mind, to provide information and progression on and to PR mod.

mg_roadster · Post by **mg_roadster** » 2006-01-03 02:13

I just hate when people lie and say that it is a server rule that you can't use armor, no matter what. When there is clearly enough people to have it be fun. And clearly enough people saying "why can't we?" So maybe they need to post something in the server rules about the amount of players and the use of armor. Or as was said earlier, code something into the mod.

DEDMON5811 · Post by **DEDMON5811** » 2006-01-03 03:08

The mod has nothing to do with the gloryhoudz server players deciding To use armor or not. If players are joining a server with 95% or more of the players requesting no armor than you should respect that request. Like was said this is not a tyranical admin deciding to boot people just because. When people are repeataly asking that you not use the armor even players on your own team. Then the decision to votekick remains on the players. Votekicking was created with the game for this very reason. If a MAJORITY that which would be required to remove a player decide that the MAJORITY's fun is being taken away by 1 person who has decided that they don't want to play as requested Issue a votekick and that votekick passes then Maybe you should start asking yourself if you want to play then follow the requests or find somewhere else to play.

Noone has said it is a gloryhoudz server rule EVER. We have only asked that for the overall enjoyment of the players that you not use the armor. There is never more than 1 or 2 players who say "Why Can't We?" If there are several players wishing to use armor than it is used.

The problem that most players have with the use of armor is very simple.
1. you can cross the 16player maps from 1 side to the other before the person you just killed with the tank has a chance to respawn. This limits the defense against instant map capping or the spawn killing that happens by those who use the armor.

2. With a 40 sec spawn time noone wants to be spawnkilled over and over plain and simple.

So please be an adult or atleast more mature than you apparently are and respect the wishes of the majority. If you can not than dont play the server and dont come here and complain that the prmm devs should do something about it. They have nothing to do with the requests and wishes of the players on any server.

Maj.b00bz · Post by **Maj.b00bz** » 2006-01-03 08:06

DEDMON5811 wrote:So please be an adult or atleast more mature than you apparently are and respect the wishes of the majority. If you can not than dont play the server and dont come here and complain that the prmm devs should do something about it. They have nothing to do with the requests and wishes of the players on any server.

You missed the point entirely. Read my original post again. Don't presume to question my maturity when you clearly didn't take the time to even look at the problem from another point of view. You may want to review that 5811 MOS seriously. Every story has two sides and there is no right answer. Once you learn that you'll stop rushing to label people without considering all the information. Otherwise you've got a long way to go if you want to make a career in law enforcement as I have, which I started as a 5811 by the way.

I did respect the the wishes of the majority, once I realize what they were. That doesn't mean I have to agree with it. Having people type in the hard-to-read chat buffer, "No Armor" is not an effective means of communication or getting your message across. I don't know about everyone else but I don't sit there to read the chat buffer. Originally, when I did catch it, I though it meant there was no enemy armor, so I needed to advance. Imagine my surprise to move up and run into an enemy tank. So at the very least, it was confusing. Especially when the kick votes started. So I asked, repeatedly what was the problem. It took a few moments for someone to respond, after all it is the chat buffer (see above). Someone finally said, "No armor on this server." Now I get it. The players don't want to use the armor on this server. So I stopped. Oddly, we lost that round to an enemy tank that rolled up and took our last spawn. Interestingly enough the kick votes never removed anyone so there goes your theory that 95% of the players supported the no armor "policy". That should have been a done deal by your rationale.

I came to this forum to get some sort of clarification on this situation and what do I see? A memeber of the R-PUB team (I stand corrected) agreeing that its ok to kick players for not adhering to other players preferences. Let me get this straight - I am playing on a server (on which no one playing holds admin rights), within the framework of the coded game and I can get kicked off for not adhering to other players playing the same game I am???? That's a heck of a recruiting and publicity tactic. "Come play PR. It's really cool. Also, if you don't play by the preferences the current players have set up, they'll kick you!! Oh and have fun!"

Does anyone not see the fundemental problem here or with playing like that? As I said, I agree there is too much armor. Eventually it will be controlled by increased spawn times or making maps without armor, whatever. I intend to ask from now on what everyone wants regarding armor, to be polite. I have learned my lesson. Not that I have to like it and I think it's a futile waste of time since there's always going to be someone new, like me, who joins in the middle of a round who doesn't get it yet, but PR is the best thing going right now for BF2. However, to take it upon yourselves, imposing your will, good intentions aside, is not the way to correct this problem. I am not asking for P-DEV to fix anything, nothing is broken. I was critical of them supporting a self-defeating player policy (corrected "them" to mean R-PUB) The game is what it is, go get more players and the armor will be neutralized. Trying to kick the ones off that are already playing is not the answer.

Lifetaker · Post by **Lifetaker** » 2006-01-03 08:40

Major b00bz, I understand your frustration. Armor doesn't bother me nearly as much as this nonstop arguing about it. I think it's important that you understand that the PR team doesn't run the servers. In fact we don't have any administrative control. All we can do is make suggestions, like anybody else. I believe that Broken Arrow was trying to get that point across. This is one of the things about online games that can be frustrating. The admins have their rules, but often the majority rules, as with kick votes. Rest assured that, as I think you've noticed, kick votes rarely work.

We are really happy that you think PRMM is the best thing going for BF2 and we hope that issues like this don't turn you or anybody else off to the mod. The Devs are working hard to put together the best playing experience they can, and believe me, this issue is not going unnoticed. So, sit tight and try to enjoy for the mean time.

Maj.b00bz · Post by **Maj.b00bz** » 2006-01-03 09:02

"Major b00bz, I understand your frustration. Armor doesn't bother me nearly as much as this nonstop arguing about it. I think it's important that you understand that the PR team doesn't run the servers."

Roger that.

"So, sit tight and try to enjoy for the mean time."
Wilco.