I love tanks! I adore them! Tanks make BF2 what is it - a great game! I was crazy about the Tiger tank in BF1942 too!!
>>>BF3 Central<<<
- Index »
- Games »
- Battlefield Series »
- Battlefield 2 »
- Whats Peoples Problems With Tanks?
Tanks are ridiculously overpowered in this game, APCs more so.
One of the problems I have with tanks is how they're used on certain maps, Karkand in particular.
Situation: You and your buddies on the USMC side have hopped in a Humvee and nipped around the side to take Suburb. This is because you're smart team-players who aren't interested in point-farming, and actually want to help your side win. Next stop will be somewhere over the river, probably Factory if you can get to it.
Suddenly, the enemy T-90 rumbles up the hill and obliterates the HJ-8. You're in trouble now. You let the rest of your team know that your infantry squad is pinned down by enemy armour. What should happen is that your friendly armour comes to help deal with the enemy armour. That's why both sides have a tank. Because armour's supposed to seek out and destroy other armour. However, what actually happens is that the guy in the Abrams is parked outside an alleyway half-way across the map mowing down infantry as they spawn.
This kind of thing happens all the time. The people in the armour are more concerned with racking up points than helping the team in the most effective way possible.
Another take I'd have on it is that if all you do is sit in a tank on Karkand, then you're not getting your moneys worth from the game. BF2 is extraordinarily diverse. The whole reason for the Battlefield series' success is its diversity, it's a mix of different playstyles all together, and frankly, if you're not happy playing a mix of those styles, why didn't you get a more focused game? There are tank sims out there, right? (Same applies to all you 'plane whores too, and you've got better choice!)
The excuse of "I suck at infantry, so I only ride a tank" is, frankly, bullshit. Of course you suck at it, you have no practice at it. And Karkand's NOT a good map to become a skilled infantryman on, because it's so often full of complete morons. You're far better off on Mashtuur or Warlord, or even Sharqi.
I really don't understand the idea that the point of the game is the points. It's certainly not. The point of the game is to play it and enjoy doing so. It's a competitive game, so you should try and win. But there's no prize for having the best points (unless you count hordes of internet weirdos ogling your stats every day a 'prize'). All points and other stats do is keep a record of how you play.
Another thing: are Abrams and T-90's air-conditioned? Seriously guys, if you're going to have to spend combat time in a middle-eastern city, do you really want to do it cooped up in a giant metal box? Get out and run around a bit, where you might catch the odd breath of fresh air.
Situation: You and your buddies on the USMC side have hopped in a Humvee and nipped around the side to take Suburb. This is because you're smart team-players who aren't interested in point-farming, and actually want to help your side win. Next stop will be somewhere over the river, probably Factory if you can get to it.
Suddenly, the enemy T-90 rumbles up the hill and obliterates the HJ-8. You're in trouble now. You let the rest of your team know that your infantry squad is pinned down by enemy armour. What should happen is that your friendly armour comes to help deal with the enemy armour. That's why both sides have a tank. Because armour's supposed to seek out and destroy other armour. However, what actually happens is that the guy in the Abrams is parked outside an alleyway half-way across the map mowing down infantry as they spawn.
This kind of thing happens all the time. The people in the armour are more concerned with racking up points than helping the team in the most effective way possible.
Another take I'd have on it is that if all you do is sit in a tank on Karkand, then you're not getting your moneys worth from the game. BF2 is extraordinarily diverse. The whole reason for the Battlefield series' success is its diversity, it's a mix of different playstyles all together, and frankly, if you're not happy playing a mix of those styles, why didn't you get a more focused game? There are tank sims out there, right? (Same applies to all you 'plane whores too, and you've got better choice!)
The excuse of "I suck at infantry, so I only ride a tank" is, frankly, bullshit. Of course you suck at it, you have no practice at it. And Karkand's NOT a good map to become a skilled infantryman on, because it's so often full of complete morons. You're far better off on Mashtuur or Warlord, or even Sharqi.
I really don't understand the idea that the point of the game is the points. It's certainly not. The point of the game is to play it and enjoy doing so. It's a competitive game, so you should try and win. But there's no prize for having the best points (unless you count hordes of internet weirdos ogling your stats every day a 'prize'). All points and other stats do is keep a record of how you play.
Another thing: are Abrams and T-90's air-conditioned? Seriously guys, if you're going to have to spend combat time in a middle-eastern city, do you really want to do it cooped up in a giant metal box? Get out and run around a bit, where you might catch the odd breath of fresh air.
I'm with Mr. 158 here, and Jester as well. It wasn't soon after I started playing Battlefield 2 that I realized that tanks are the biggest pussies in the game. Everytime I hop in the mounted gunner seat of a tank, or take up the role of commander, all I ever see the tanks doing is sitting as far away as possible from where they can ACTUALLY be of use, crowding around spawnpoints just mowing people down...not even taking the damn flag nearby. if you're going to roll in armor, then listen up to your commander and pay attention to the map...seek out and destroy enemy armor or at LEAST make an ATTEMPT at weakening it. I don't even hop in the gunner seat anymore because I can't remember the last time a tank drove in to anywhere actually vital to the battle. You're invulnerable to half the kits in the game, and it's sickening how willingly and how often this kind of cowardice occurs.
Tanks are not overpowered, it is the anti-tank weapons that are old and underpowered.
Well 24% of your kills are from guns..James-m wrote:
Ok, it sais it in the title, im not going to repeat it. Quite a few peoples stats, like mine, are,
1. medic
2. tank
3. karkand as their favorite map
4. and weapon usually assault rifle
people complain at this? im not so sure why, its a good way to earn points no?
24%? Ouch. Even I think that's pretty damn bad.Simon wrote:
Well 24% of your kills are from guns..James-m wrote:
Ok, it sais it in the title, im not going to repeat it. Quite a few peoples stats, like mine, are,
1. medic
2. tank
3. karkand as their favorite map
4. and weapon usually assault rifle
people complain at this? im not so sure why, its a good way to earn points no?
u've never played bf1942, did you? so many people did and do just play it for having fun and action and not for points (because there is no ranking )!!James-m wrote:
ofcourse im playing it for points...........? thats the whole object of the game, to get points and earn rank..... theres no other way to play it.
you should not play for earning points because THAT is in my opinion the real start of being a whore... you think: oh i wanna points, hm what is the best map to get points...: oh strike at karkand..... and whats the best vehicle to earn points there....: oh tank.. cool!! hm and whats the best class to earn points while not sitting in tank....: oh yes medic! woohoooo now i can earn points a lot
i dunno why you still wonder when people call you a whore
and btw: you should not wonder why all pilots are better than you when you've just trained plane for 5 hours!
medic tank + engineer apc convoy ftwJames-m wrote:
i enjoy the sound of the Abrams.... the thought of bringing the power and might to the battlefield.... helping out the ground pounders, i enjoy doing it. they might like seeing me in the abrams, especially if enemy armor is about
tanks overpowered? hahahatehmoogles wrote:
Tanks are ridiculously overpowered in this game, APCs more so.
when my tank round lands 2 feet from an enemy and he continues along on his merry way unharmed, it is definately NOT overpowered.
as for tank vs tank, whoever gets first hit and can maneuver better will win.
"James-M is playing Strike At Karkand on 137 Warzone Ranked, 24/7 HIGH POINT Karkand"
Says it all
Says it all
so you have an alienwarejames@alienware wrote:
"James-M is playing Strike At Karkand on 137 Warzone Ranked, 24/7 HIGH POINT Karkand"
Says it all
Is this an attempt to derail....but yes.AK5489 wrote:
so you have an alienwarejames@alienware wrote:
"James-M is playing Strike At Karkand on 137 Warzone Ranked, 24/7 HIGH POINT Karkand"
Says it all
Its just a game. So you should play it for fun and not just to enlarge your e-penis.James-m wrote:
ofcourse im playing it for points...........? thats the whole object of the game, to get points and earn rank..... theres no other way to play it.
loljames@alienware wrote:
Is this an attempt to derail....but yes.AK5489 wrote:
so you have an alienwarejames@alienware wrote:
"James-M is playing Strike At Karkand on 137 Warzone Ranked, 24/7 HIGH POINT Karkand"
Says it all
Yeah I agree tanks aren't overpowered, the AT weapons are underpowered. You get either the SRAW or ERYX, which IMO suck, and can take anything up to 4 or 5 hits to destroy armour if you are really unlucky or it is next to a supply crate. I think the power of the AT rockets should either be powered up in a patch or give the option of having a newer, better AT unlock (like the AT-4 which is actually useful against tanks). I also think the splash damage on the AT rockets suck as well, but these are just my humble opinions.
alot is knowing where to hit tanks also...ive put 4 or 5 AT missiles into a tank and for nothing. then on other occasions ive taken a full health tank down in 2 hits.[BBF]Snake wrote:
Yeah I agree tanks aren't overpowered, the AT weapons are underpowered. You get either the SRAW or ERYX, which IMO suck, and can take anything up to 4 or 5 hits to destroy armour if you are really unlucky or it is next to a supply crate. I think the power of the AT rockets should either be powered up in a patch or give the option of having a newer, better AT unlock (like the AT-4 which is actually useful against tanks). I also think the splash damage on the AT rockets suck as well, but these are just my humble opinions.
True, but that is not the point. The anti-tank weapons are very old technology.AK5489 wrote:
alot is knowing where to hit tanks also...ive put 4 or 5 AT missiles into a tank and for nothing. then on other occasions ive taken a full health tank down in 2 hits.[BBF]Snake wrote:
Yeah I agree tanks aren't overpowered, the AT weapons are underpowered. You get either the SRAW or ERYX, which IMO suck, and can take anything up to 4 or 5 hits to destroy armour if you are really unlucky or it is next to a supply crate. I think the power of the AT rockets should either be powered up in a patch or give the option of having a newer, better AT unlock (like the AT-4 which is actually useful against tanks). I also think the splash damage on the AT rockets suck as well, but these are just my humble opinions.
I agree for the most part, but I understand their splash damage decision...they didn't want to make it overpowered, though AT is underpowered as it stands. The way I see it, 2-3 shots should take out a tank always, as opposed to the 3-5 now. 1-2 for an APC or armored flying vehicle, and one shot for everything else GUARANTEED. Firing an antiTANK rocket at a damn vodnik or hummer should ALWAYS kill it. Not leave it severely damaged, not set it on fire so it EVENTUALLY explodes. It's just absolutely, inexcusably fucking retarded that a weapon meant for heavily armored terrestrial vehicles can't take out a simple transport or flyer with a direct hit...I don't know how anyone EVER thought that was a REMOTELY good idea.[BBF]Snake wrote:
Yeah I agree tanks aren't overpowered, the AT weapons are underpowered. You get either the SRAW or ERYX, which IMO suck, and can take anything up to 4 or 5 hits to destroy armour if you are really unlucky or it is next to a supply crate. I think the power of the AT rockets should either be powered up in a patch or give the option of having a newer, better AT unlock (like the AT-4 which is actually useful against tanks). I also think the splash damage on the AT rockets suck as well, but these are just my humble opinions.
And thats why everyone thinks your a fucktard because you spend about 90% of your gaming time in one .Its because your afraid to get owned by the gun .I admit i suck but i wouldnt resort to be a lame cunt and spending my time in a tank just to build up a false spm and k/d ratio.You sir is what is wrong with this game.Nikola Bathory wrote:
I love tanks! I adore them! Tanks make BF2 what is it - a great game! I was crazy about the Tiger tank in BF1942 too!!
Its amazing how some who say that tank/APC whores are worthless scum are the same people, when you look at their stats, get 1/3 or more of their vehicle kills from either jets or helicopters. Rather hypocritical don't you think? Can't we simply agree that some people enjoy playing in ground vehicles and others enjoy playing up in aerial vehicles and move on? Probably not since it is easier to argue endlessly about which is right or wrong.
It'a a .... wait for it....game. Try playing for fun.James-m wrote:
ofcourse im playing it for points...........? thats the whole object of the game, to get points and earn rank..... theres no other way to play it.
If people actually play a game for points I think it is really sad.
I think what you mean might be that playing for points is what is fun for you??
People should just keep in mind that different people enjoy different things, so of course they will play differently, but I do think that everybody has more fun if all the players have similar goals, eg. K/D, winning, vehicles, etc.
That's why I don't have a problem with Karkand, it keeps all of the people who have different goals and ways of having fun on it, and therefore not on the servers that I like to play on (almost every other map).
To each his own...
Look forward to killing all of you at some point though.
This is practically a guide, but it's meant as explanation.
A truly skilled tank or APC driver is more than point and click, and a truly skilled tank driver doesn't camp bases or rape alleyways. First, you have to know WHERE to point (Okay, that's kind of obvious) whether on tanks, cars etc. It actually takes a measure of skill to hit a fast moving car (FAV) or something moving parallel to your line of sight. Sadly, for some reason there's some weird thing with tank shells where you'll see it hit the target, but if it hits at the wrong angle it does no damage at all. It may have to do with lag or something, but I've seen it happen so many times.
You have to be aware of everything around you (I still haven't mastered this quite yet). You have to know common AT spots, TOW locations, where your team mates are (woops, sorry I ran you over! ). You should be a squad leader just so that you can request UAV, supplies and spots (If you have VOIP and / or TS or ventrilo).
It's also how you use the tank. If someone is using the tank just for infantry rape and such, they are probably not very good. Anyone can shoot a medic running across the street. But if the person in the tank always knows where the other armor is and engages them as soon as they know where they are and wins, then that person is quite a bit more skilled. Tank VS Tank battles are not really based on luck or who fires first (Although if you're paying attention to UAV and Commander Spots as I've told you, you probably will get first and maybe second shot) it's where you hit, and depending on range, how you compensate (Tank rounds drop significantly as range increases). It's also how you maneuver and use your assets (Allied engineers, any supply boxes around, cover! Yes, in a tank cover can be useful. Positioning yourself behind a low barrier that covers your treads and most everything except your cannon makes it so the enemy tank has a smaller target, and he can't hit any weak spots.)
But it all comes down to the main reason I get in tanks. It's usually because A) I'm better with them than anyone else in the average 8-12 player team, B) Because NO ONE ELSE IS USING IT (Worst mistakes ever in my opinion), or C) Because Armor is crucial to the winning of a match, especially in maps such as Mashtuur, Karkand, Wake, and Sharqi Peninsula (From most crucial to least), where there are no bomber jets and only one Attack Helicopter per side.
Although even being an armor whore, I agree AT needs to be improved. Even if it took one less shot to destroy a tank, a skilled driver would be able to see AT via UAV or spot (if there was one) or just through observing and stop them before they became a major problem, but ATs would actually be able to get some tank kills (What they were MEANT FOR!)
In my opinion, a tank driver camping alleyways or spawn points is not very good (Camping is not allowed on the servers I play on - it makes me joyful to see people get kicked or a 12 hour ban for it. Also, there are usually very few infantry players to camp because [on the karkand server I play on] there are 3 pieces of armor per side and only 8-12 people), and if they came up against another tank driver depending on the other's skill, they would probably lose. I've never been a spawncamper on purpose (as in, gone to an enemy spawn thinking 'I think I'll go spawn rape their asses and get some points), although the clan I'm in has some strict rules regarding the fact so sometimes I'll catch myself (or other members will) staying at an enemy flag without being in capping range a little too long, and if I still can't get in capture range I'll just back off.
The fact is, I no longer play in armor for points. I play it for my team and for fun. God knows that when this infantry only feature comes out, I'm going to be playing it all the time, because infantry is better than tanks. But while we're still on maps with tanks, I'll be using tanks unless I can trust my team with them. This said, I've actually spent only 1/5th of my playing time in armor.
A truly skilled tank or APC driver is more than point and click, and a truly skilled tank driver doesn't camp bases or rape alleyways. First, you have to know WHERE to point (Okay, that's kind of obvious) whether on tanks, cars etc. It actually takes a measure of skill to hit a fast moving car (FAV) or something moving parallel to your line of sight. Sadly, for some reason there's some weird thing with tank shells where you'll see it hit the target, but if it hits at the wrong angle it does no damage at all. It may have to do with lag or something, but I've seen it happen so many times.
You have to be aware of everything around you (I still haven't mastered this quite yet). You have to know common AT spots, TOW locations, where your team mates are (woops, sorry I ran you over! ). You should be a squad leader just so that you can request UAV, supplies and spots (If you have VOIP and / or TS or ventrilo).
It's also how you use the tank. If someone is using the tank just for infantry rape and such, they are probably not very good. Anyone can shoot a medic running across the street. But if the person in the tank always knows where the other armor is and engages them as soon as they know where they are and wins, then that person is quite a bit more skilled. Tank VS Tank battles are not really based on luck or who fires first (Although if you're paying attention to UAV and Commander Spots as I've told you, you probably will get first and maybe second shot) it's where you hit, and depending on range, how you compensate (Tank rounds drop significantly as range increases). It's also how you maneuver and use your assets (Allied engineers, any supply boxes around, cover! Yes, in a tank cover can be useful. Positioning yourself behind a low barrier that covers your treads and most everything except your cannon makes it so the enemy tank has a smaller target, and he can't hit any weak spots.)
But it all comes down to the main reason I get in tanks. It's usually because A) I'm better with them than anyone else in the average 8-12 player team, B) Because NO ONE ELSE IS USING IT (Worst mistakes ever in my opinion), or C) Because Armor is crucial to the winning of a match, especially in maps such as Mashtuur, Karkand, Wake, and Sharqi Peninsula (From most crucial to least), where there are no bomber jets and only one Attack Helicopter per side.
Although even being an armor whore, I agree AT needs to be improved. Even if it took one less shot to destroy a tank, a skilled driver would be able to see AT via UAV or spot (if there was one) or just through observing and stop them before they became a major problem, but ATs would actually be able to get some tank kills (What they were MEANT FOR!)
In my opinion, a tank driver camping alleyways or spawn points is not very good (Camping is not allowed on the servers I play on - it makes me joyful to see people get kicked or a 12 hour ban for it. Also, there are usually very few infantry players to camp because [on the karkand server I play on] there are 3 pieces of armor per side and only 8-12 people), and if they came up against another tank driver depending on the other's skill, they would probably lose. I've never been a spawncamper on purpose (as in, gone to an enemy spawn thinking 'I think I'll go spawn rape their asses and get some points), although the clan I'm in has some strict rules regarding the fact so sometimes I'll catch myself (or other members will) staying at an enemy flag without being in capping range a little too long, and if I still can't get in capture range I'll just back off.
The fact is, I no longer play in armor for points. I play it for my team and for fun. God knows that when this infantry only feature comes out, I'm going to be playing it all the time, because infantry is better than tanks. But while we're still on maps with tanks, I'll be using tanks unless I can trust my team with them. This said, I've actually spent only 1/5th of my playing time in armor.
I wholeheatedly agree. However, I'd like to throw my own opinion and solution into the ring.MrE`158 wrote:
One of the problems I have with tanks is how they're used on certain maps, Karkand in particular.
Situation: You and your buddies on the USMC side have hopped in a Humvee and nipped around the side to take Suburb. This is because you're smart team-players who aren't interested in point-farming, and actually want to help your side win. Next stop will be somewhere over the river, probably Factory if you can get to it.
Suddenly, the enemy T-90 rumbles up the hill and obliterates the HJ-8. You're in trouble now. You let the rest of your team know that your infantry squad is pinned down by enemy armour. What should happen is that your friendly armour comes to help deal with the enemy armour. That's why both sides have a tank. Because armour's supposed to seek out and destroy other armour. However, what actually happens is that the guy in the Abrams is parked outside an alleyway half-way across the map mowing down infantry as they spawn.
This kind of thing happens all the time. The people in the armour are more concerned with racking up points than helping the team in the most effective way possible.
Another take I'd have on it is that if all you do is sit in a tank on Karkand, then you're not getting your moneys worth from the game. BF2 is extraordinarily diverse. The whole reason for the Battlefield series' success is its diversity, it's a mix of different playstyles all together, and frankly, if you're not happy playing a mix of those styles, why didn't you get a more focused game? There are tank sims out there, right? (Same applies to all you 'plane whores too, and you've got better choice!)
The excuse of "I suck at infantry, so I only ride a tank" is, frankly, bullshit. Of course you suck at it, you have no practice at it. And Karkand's NOT a good map to become a skilled infantryman on, because it's so often full of complete morons. You're far better off on Mashtuur or Warlord, or even Sharqi.
I really don't understand the idea that the point of the game is the points. It's certainly not. The point of the game is to play it and enjoy doing so. It's a competitive game, so you should try and win. But there's no prize for having the best points (unless you count hordes of internet weirdos ogling your stats every day a 'prize'). All points and other stats do is keep a record of how you play.
Another thing: are Abrams and T-90's air-conditioned? Seriously guys, if you're going to have to spend combat time in a middle-eastern city, do you really want to do it cooped up in a giant metal box? Get out and run around a bit, where you might catch the odd breath of fresh air.
I have no offence with people going in tanks - but them going in tanks for the majority (or often) the whole round. The same applies to the other vehicles. Especially round after round after round...
The only solution that I can think of is that if you die while in a tank/helicopter/plane etc. you cannot enter a vehicle of that class for, say, 2 minutes. This would wipe the smile off their faces and seperate the great tankers from the ones who just 'whore' points. The infantry-only attacking tankers would be torn apart and their shreads spat out in disgust.
There are a couple of downsides to this solution, namely being:
1. An enemy could stroll up and take a tank while you are waiting for two minutes to be up.
2. Could it promote tankers to more solely go after infantry?
In reply to 1. I can see that this would promote teamwork and squad-work. When you get destroyed, someone else in your squad, or team, would have to go and take responsability for that vehicle. Say, two people in a squad could cycle responsibilty for a certain vehicle.
In accordance to showing most viewpoints in my posts, my reply to 2. would be that it is no worse than what happens currently, and if you destroy them and they have no teamwork - no enemy vehicle to worry about for a while.
I hope this helps some people.
All the best, Andy.
Wow, that looks even longer now that I posted it. How many people will read that?!
- Index »
- Games »
- Battlefield Series »
- Battlefield 2 »
- Whats Peoples Problems With Tanks?