View Poll Results: When in a tank, do you prefer someone as a gunner in F2 seat?
- Voters
- 48. You may not vote on this poll
-
Yes, always.
41 85.42% -
No, never.
7 14.58%
+ Reply to Thread
Results 31 to 40 of 40
Discussion: Battlefield 2142 / Battlefield 2142 - Tactics and Missions Discussion - Tanks: with or without a gunner? - Yeah that is all fine and dandy until your bursts get noticed by the enemy
-
05-02-2009, 12:57 PM #31
- Join Date
- Oct 2007
- Location
- Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
- Age
- 22
- Posts
- 2,436
Re: Tanks: with or without a gunner?
Yeah that is all fine and dandy until your bursts get noticed by the enemy team and then you have multiple engineers engaging you from different sides, thereby putting your tank in danger.
-
05-02-2009, 01:06 PM #32
- Join Date
- Mar 2008
- Location
- Ave Maria, FL
- Age
- 22
- Posts
- 1,623
Re: Tanks: with or without a gunner?
I'm fairly certain that if there are infantry moving to engage you the enemy is already aware of your presence. In fact, the moment you fire off your first shell you reveal your identity, and that's assuming the enemy has no PDS up.
The machinegunner is there specifically to help you focus your fire, protecting your flanks while you engage the highest priority target first.
EVE Online: Yumi Hikare
"I've done everything I can... There are no heroes left in man..."
-
05-02-2009, 01:59 PM #33
Re: Tanks: with or without a gunner?
I think I can count the people I killed with the Tank Gunner gun on 1 hand
-
05-02-2009, 02:52 PM #34
- Join Date
- Aug 2007
- Location
- Next door to Alice
- Age
- 37
- Posts
- 3,489
Re: Tanks: with or without a gunner?
I ran with Insun last night doing the repair monkey / gunner job. It was fun keeping him up and I needed 2 hands to count my kills for the night in the tank gunner seat. Not so much about kills for me as keeping Insun and the tank alive. He brought IDS and I brought PDS. I watched his flanks and he decimated all who were silly enough to think they could get to us! There were quite a few occasions were I spotted enemies he couldn't have seen because of the FOV in the tank.
-
05-02-2009, 03:00 PM #35
- Join Date
- Jan 2008
- Location
- Ireland
- Age
- 38
- Posts
- 1,637
Re: Tanks: with or without a gunner?
If you are in urban areas or advancing to a heavy situation and getting in close then I think a gunner is needed to watch the rear and help spot enemies, and provide repairs when needed.
-
05-02-2009, 03:33 PM #36
- Join Date
- Mar 2008
- Location
- Lowell/Medford, MA
- Age
- 26
- Posts
- 549
Re: Tanks: with or without a gunner?
Countless times I've snuck up on tanks with no gunners dropped RDX and ran before they even knew I was there. Zhohar, I almost snuck up on you once on Verdun, but another tank that was coming out of your UCB saw me and killed me before I could blow the RDX that was on your tank. It was easy to sneak up to you, even without cloaking because you were looking at the flag and I ran in from your flank.
If you go alone, you can't have IDS since you need that repair tool. Meaning you need to either rely on your CO or hope noone's ballsy enough to try to sneak up to you.
Pros of a gunner:
- Heightened situational awareness.
However, despite that, I agree that having a gunner on a map like Verdun is a waste of a soldier. If a lone recon does somehow sneak up to you and get RDX on you, then oh well. He spent all that time doing nothing but creeping up on you, which means he spent all that time to remove one ticket from the enemy team. In hindsight, in the above situation, I should've just stayed back and told my squad to just stay behind cover so that Zhohar couldn't have hit them. Effectively making his consistent barrage a non-factor. We knew where he was, and I found plenty of spots that his shells couldn't hit from where he was.
Also seen from the example above. Having a 2nd tank further back, instead of a gunner, is an alternative that gives you more fire power, while still covering your flank. Granted if they get around and get to the other tank, nobody's coving his flank. But the amount of tickets another tank can take away from the enemy is alot higher compared to the number of tickets a gunner on a tank could.
-
05-02-2009, 08:24 PM #37
Re: Tanks: with or without a gunner?
These situations are not few, nor are they many. They are non-existent. You don't need to move closer than 100m to your target.
Originally Posted by LordKelvin
If you can't see targets or know they are hiding behind cover, then shift your angle of approach. Draw a circle of 150m radius, your target flag in the middle, and simply tread the circumference of that circle around the flag. You don't need to get closer to engage infantry.
It's not a question of whether this person has ANY use at all -- I am sure he can sit there with a medhub and heal up passing vehicles/infantry -- it's that his time is significantly better spent doing other things for the team. Such as running a second tank with interlocking fields of fire.
This is just a simple lack of situational awareness. Does your lack of situational awareness justify keeping a person useless on the team? I don't think so. You need to scan your surroundings and be sure that friendly flags are behind you.PM and I tank together all the time, and he's saved me more times than I can count by alerting me to infantry or armor flanking me, which I was unable to see because I was zoomed in and shooting at another target.
Basic point here is -- the one you haven't addressed: the gunner's firepower is useless at the main cannon's range, and the distance to target makes his repair abilities nearly useless.
So unless you are engaging below 100m or within EMP range, you are wasting a person by keeping them in the gunner seat.Fight!
-
05-02-2009, 11:21 PM #38
- Join Date
- Apr 2007
- Location
- Pittsburgh
- Age
- 24
- Posts
- 1,705
Re: Tanks: with or without a gunner?
Zhohar, you seem to be discussing armor-heavy maps like Tampa, Shuhia, and occasionally Verdun. Everywhere on Belgrade, for instance, you're within 100m or within EMP range. Additionally, there is no other tank for you to use "interlocking fields of fire".
-
05-03-2009, 03:14 AM #39
Re: Tanks: with or without a gunner?
True, Belgrade is the exception, like Lyra mentioned. Belgrade's unique mix of armor and infantry is the reason we love it so much. Originally Posted by Razcsak
Back to the point though -- what I'm discussing applies to: Suez, Tampa, Sidi, Shuhia, Verdun, and even Minsk.Fight!
-
05-03-2009, 10:02 AM #40
- Join Date
- Apr 2008
- Location
- London
- Age
- 30
- Posts
- 2,243
Re: Tanks: with or without a gunner?
On Belgrade, this gun works well, as infantry are generally closer and at all angles. Originally Posted by Lyramion
On larger maps however, it's useless, and a gunner is not needed, unless your the type who takes a lot of damage, and need a repair monkey. Your better off having 2 tanks repairing eachother, with twice the firepower!BF3 Soldier: DrSparky
"Cum bellum clamavit, respondivi"
Reply With Quote
Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
Bookmarks