BF2S Forums Tanks: New info

so shut up rotter...you have been told lol

If you shoot that backside of a tank at about a 45 degree angle, the spread of the explosion will make sure that you take it out in one rocket. Mostly it will make the tank flame, (which ends in an explosion,) but the guy will get out, and you can kill him. Either that or he stays in the tank too long and gets killed by it blowing up. Tanks arn't that hard to kill as AT if you have any kind of cover near by, or if you are in the right place.

If you can't get to the back of a tank, go for the tracks. These are another weak point, (not as weak as the back,) and are accessable from all angles.

And be careful NYLON. In World War Two, New Zealand's only home defence tank was made out of an old tractor with some corrugated iron armour and a mounted machine gun. Everyone was stoked too, they thought it was brilliant.

Last edited by Tyferra (2005-12-09 19:26:18)

<{SoE}>Agamemnar wrote:

Again... the tanks that are in the game IRL can take an ungodly amount of RPGs in the ass or otherwise. IRL IS NOT THE BIBLE WHEN IT COMES TO BF2, WHICH IS A GAME.

So I don't see the point of trying to make a balancing changed based on life?

An RPG is not the same as AT. An RPG is more or less what n00b tubers do. Just as you can get armor peircing bullets (mostly, depleted uranium) that will not only go clean thru you, but also the bullet proof vest you're wearing; there are shoulder fired missles that will take out a tank in one hit. Otherwise, infantry doesn't stand a chance. The T-90 for instance, is a POS Russian made tank. It's one example of what the Iraqis' used against use in the Gulf War (along with T-60's), it served them well mhmm?

AT rounds don't kill with their explosiveness so much as their penetration. In the tip of them is a hardened(again, usually depleted uranium) spike that is designed to penetrate armor. Once it does it bounces around inside the target destroying the inside and killing the personel.


The AT kit needs to be beefed up.




~I didn't look any of this up, it's all personal knowlege and is subject to error.

Sud wrote:

middle eastern tanks are more useful for holding beverages such as Pepsi than they are for fighting

why not coke or fanta

I usually die a couple of times trying to take out a tank no many how I flank it or hide. No matter in which perspective you look at it that kit is gimp.


As for the British Challenger I have a hard time swallowing it's armored to the point of immunity. Do you mean the Challenger one, or two. Give me some elaboration. You've got me curious now so I'm going to do some research.

wasn't one of those M1A1 losses in the first gulf war confirmed as friendly fire also?

An RPG is not the same as AT. An RPG is more or less what n00b tubers do. Just as you can get armor peircing bullets (mostly, depleted uranium) that will not only go clean thru you, but also the bullet proof vest you're wearing; there are shoulder fired missles that will take out a tank in one hit. Otherwise, infantry doesn't stand a chance. The T-90 for instance, is a POS Russian made tank. It's one example of what the Iraqis' used against use in the Gulf War (along with T-60's), it served them well mhmm?

AT rounds don't kill with their explosiveness so much as their penetration. In the tip of them is a hardened(again, usually depleted uranium) spike that is designed to penetrate armor. Once it does it bounces around inside the target destroying the inside and killing the personel.


The AT kit needs to be beefed up.


~I didn't look any of this up, it's all personal knowlege and is subject to error.

Sure it is full of error.

1. Gulf War was in 1991. T-90 MBT's production started in 1993....so there was no T-90 in the Gulf War.

2. RPG series weapons has 2 different grenade types. AP and AT. The maximum range for antitank grenades against area targets is 920 meters, at which point the round self-destructs after its 4.5 second flight. The antipersonnel grenades reach over 1100 meters. Among the production grenades are the PG-7, PG-7M, PG-7N, and PG-7VL antitank grenades with armor penetrability of up to 600mm of rolled homogeneous steel. (The smaller versions has 330-375mm penetration) The PG-7VR is a tandem warhead designed to penetrate explosive reactive armor and the armor underneath. The OG-7 and OG-7M are high-explosive antipersonnel grenades. It's not like a n00b tuber...

it annoyes me that the Abraham tank in BF2 takes damage from every small bump in the road. its a tank for gods sake. a massive collection of metal and it is not made out of cake. also it is a massive disadvantage versus the T98 and T90 tanks because those don't suffer from bumpy roads.

The reason that you whined about the AT kit is that it takes 4-5 hits from the front to kill it.  Tanks are FAR more heavily armored in the front than anywhere else!  Tankers are trained to expose as little of the sides and rear as possible to take advantage of that.  If they were equally armored, either A, they'd be blown to shit on any side, or B, they'd be so slow that they'd be pounded by all sorts of guided and unguided munitions till it was finally overwhelmed (and besides, it would be horrendously expensive).

Always, always always always aim for the tracks, the sides, the rear, or the top.  Never engage a tank from the front if you can avoid it.  I've never experienced a 1-hit KO with a rocket, but 2-hits are pretty common if you can hit those areas.  And even if there's a chance that they will lay smoke and run away, there's still some chance to hit him if he doesn't round a corner, and if there's another AT guy, you can hide on opposite sides of a street and hit him simultaneously from both sides and kill him.

Oh, and if you want to know, in Baghdad, the only tank taken out was a 1 in a million shot from slightly below and behind by a recoiless rifle (it penetrated a weak spot, hit the fuel tank, and it leaked onto the hot engine).  Some of those tanks got hit by well over a half-dozen RPGs.  And some to the sides as well (kudos for American engineering).  And after that, they stuffed thermite grenades down the hatch (this is to prevent the M1 from being useful to the enemy), hit it with a HEAT (High Explosive Anti Tank) round, hit it with a Hellfire missle (earlier Hellfires, with less explosive, have been known to blow T-60s and T-72s apart with incredible violence), and even after that, the Iraqis staged a show on top of it.  The tank still looked intact.  Really kudos to American engineering.  All in all, tanks are surprisingly durable.  And little bumps should definitely not affect a tank-they've got pretty good suspension, tracks (which take explosives, not bullets, to eliminate), and are quite sturdy.  Unless you've got some idiot running head on at 20-25 MPH into a wall, tanks aren't going to be affected by terrain much.  Oh, and as for speed-tanks are a lot faster IRL, to the point at which speed limiters are put on them (of course, you will never find a speed limiter on a tank in the military-everybody quite quickly "loses" them and the supply seargents "lose" the orders for more).

Rotter wrote:

I'd like to tell some people what I've read and heard about tanks. In BF2, if you are in a tank, you are pretty much guaranteed of making many kills before being killed if you have any skill at all. I mean, you just sit there, watch where the enemy spawns, and shoot anything that moves. And, it takes four to five missiles to kill the tank from the front. Do you know what? In Israel, when fighting Siria, Israel has had major losses of tanks, due to anti tank hand held weaponry. (Thus, they're now relying mostly on air) You know why? Because, you fire an anti-tank shoulder launched missile at a tank, and it's dead. One shot, one kill. Period.

Now, to make it more realistic and feasable for the ant-tankers in BF2, I think that EA should make the tanks killed by three shots to the front, two to the side, and one or two to the front. And, I think that Transport and Choppers should ALWAYS explode on the first shot from a tank, APC missile, or anti-tank missile. This would make the game more fun, and more realistic. That's my vote, and I've said this before, but I just wanted to tell people how much damage an anti-tank missile can do in real life.

1 shot 1 kill is absolutly bull.. the american Abram tank can actually take 3/4 hits and still be able to get away.
And the transport should actually be stronger.. the american Humvee is like indestructable.. shoot a missle at is and it keepss on drivin.. and its a game.. so it doesnt need much realism.. and they need to make a balance.. if a tank could blow a chopper right out of the sky.. then choppers would be in a disadvantage.. that's my vote..