Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

1 man vehicles in 0.7

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • 1 man vehicles in 0.7

    I was just thinking about what I've seen/felt in 0.7 since its been released, and kind of mixing it in with everything I've been reading here on the forum and I was wondering what you all thought about this....

    To me, with all the changes that came with 0.7, it seems like it slows things down and encourages us to be more deliberate with our tactics. So say there was an objective to be assaulted by an infantry squad, as the assault is being planned say the idea is to have the Tank/APC take up a position at long range to the infantry's advance to the objective. That is the vehicle is staying to the rear and using its zoom and guns to protect the infantry as they push forward. Being that the vehicle is planned to be stationary during this assault, Im kind of thinking it would be better to give up the driver and have him become an infantryman up front pushing forward to the objective. The 30 seconds before the gun can move really wouldnt be a factor, and should by some chance the tank should need to move to regroup or pickup the 2nd crewmember, the gunner can just change seats and move.

    Obviously I envision this scenario taking place when it doesnt infringe on the needs/wishes of the Commander or any dedicated vehicle squads.

    Like I said, Im just running this all around in my head here. I've been seeing posts lately mentioning that a one man Tank/APC is more useless than ever, and it got me thinking.
    Hope the grammar is not too bad here.... Im at work but still thining PR and I had to let out the thought.

    Is a planned and approved one man Tank/APC even more worthless than ever, or am I on to something ??

    Thnx

    |

  • #2
    Re: 1 man vehicles in 0.7

    In the case you describe, it could work. But only for a while. The reality of the situation is that eventually that tank is going to have maneuver, fire, maneuver, fire, etc. This cannot be done with a one-man crew. At some point, using the tank as essentially an artillery position will result in it being ineffective as it will be easily out-flanked by opposing armor or even a H-AT fireteam.

    Let me give two examples:

    Last night on Kashan, my squad encountered a one-man APC inside one of the north bunkers. We managed to smoke the him up, get an engineer on him with C4 - no more APC. He was firing wildly but could not move. Easy prey.

    Also yesterday: Chinese tanks were being taken by 1-man crews and taken to the fight at Fishing Village. They literally just got there when they were swarmed by enemy infantry and easily dispatched as their turrets were frozen and they were defenseless. This happened at least 3 times, and the last 2 were after I issued a direct order as CO to my SL to not let their SM take the tanks with 1 crewman. We were almost run off the map after this, to the point where the enemy were attacking our main and we got lucky and pushed them out. This wouldn't have happened with fully functional tanks.

    The 30-second delay makes 1-man tanks defenseless. The only exception might be if they have close, and I mean very close, infantry support. So, it begs the question, what is a better usage of a squad? 2 guys in a tank, or 1 and 3 or 4 supporting it outside?

    "You milsim guys are ruining the game."

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: 1 man vehicles in 0.7

      The key to armor is movement and fire. The problem arises when an enemy HAT, tank or helo shows up and starts shooting at you. You need to be able to fire and move to survive. With your infantry so far away you are also at an increase risk of an engineer attack.

      The other problem is what if your driver dies and you lose your rally. Now you have a one man tank with a driver on the other side of the map. An almost guaranteed chance of dieing.

      Also the advance will go more smoothly with two in the tank. The driver moves the tank for better fire angles and the gunner takes out targets of opportunity. The driver can help spot targets both offensive and defensive. You do not want to be the driver and see a target, hop into the gunner area and wait 30 seconds. By then the target is gone, unless he is a noob.

      I know what you are talking about. I've tried it on Kashin over looking the bunkers and south village. I lost the tank when an enemy tank came around from behind. With what you are trying to do is best done with two squads one infantry and the other tank. The last thing I'll say is that tanks take forever to respawn and are a major asset on the ground. They need to be guarded and fully manned. For me thats a driver, gunner and engineer. No matter what the task is.

      that's my 0.02 worth


      A good leader requires both character and strategy. If he is to be without one, let it be strategy. - General Rick Hilliar, Former Canadian Chief of Defence

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: 1 man vehicles in 0.7

        I still 1 man crew APC occasionally but its hard to argue for a 1 man tank unless theres six lying spare at base. Use of good hard cover is a good idea either way and close infantry mutual support as mentioned


        If you find yourself in a fair fight, then you have obviously failed to plan properly.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: 1 man vehicles in 0.7

          I can see a 1 man apc being worthwhile to ferry troops, but i hope to see a 2 man apc used more to ferry troops and provide cover....

          If someone wants to use a 1 man tank, play Vanilla BF2, this is TG PR, it is built on Team Work, The new 0.7 mod is a perfect example of why 1 man tanks do not work, and won't work, i applaud them for making the 30 second delay.....

          i can only see it working if a Squad member gets a crewman kit, brings a tank up to a firebase where there is a crewman and/or an engineer waiting....thats the only conceivable (sp?) situation i can see.....other than that...its a waste of armor and tickets.
          Randy = Ace ! - Warlab
          Level II Volunteer FireFighter
          Level I HazMat Technician
          NYS EMT-B
          Town of Mamaroneck Fire Dept.

          sigpic




          Bring On Project Reality 1.0!!!
          RSS Feeds:Bamboo | | 9/11 - Never Forget |
          Apophis - "TG was created to cater to a VERY specific type of gamer rather than trying to appeal to the greater gaming population.
          Tactical Gamer is not mainstream.
          We are not trying to attract mainstream gamers."

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: 1 man vehicles in 0.7

            1 man tank is worthless in 0.7 period. If youre motoring around and you spot enemy troops/armor/anything, it takes 30 seconds after you switch seats to fire. In this amount of time, any smart cookie is either going to pop HAT down your throat, hit you with two tank shots, or notify the rest of his team where you are so you can be take out that much easier. Your only option is to just get back in the drivers seat and run before you get popped. As far as one manning it with infantry helping outside, all it takes is one grenade, one heat round, one guy with good rifle aim or one LAT/HAT and your infantry support has just disappeared like a fart in the wind. Anyone using a one man tank intentionally now is just plain stupid, at best.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: 1 man vehicles in 0.7

              Only vehicle I see still fit for a one man to operate is the Humvee or the enemy equivalent. That is not used for his sole purpose either but for the squad. Last night on Kashan we had a guy that was just transporting us back and forth to our firebase as we(Mainly me I should say cause I was using HAT) needed it. He was also an engineer for the tank squad we just so happened to be in, so he transported me to the firebase for ammo resupply and back to my location then if the tanks needed any repairing he was able to truck back and forth between the two. I can not remember that persons name but do remember they were wearing the TG tags, all I have to say was this was brilliant for him to do so much for this squad by using the Humvee the way he did. Not positive but I also think he did some good gunning to take out infantry with the gun of the humvee while the tanks were preoccupied with other enemy tanks.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: 1 man vehicles in 0.7

                I really have to agree. A one man tank is a frivolous use of team resources, no matter how anyone tries to justify it. Tanks need to be mobile in modern combat. This is why you rarely see gun emplacements designed to take out soldiers and tanks like was common in WWII. Everything needs to stay as mobile as possible in order to move at a moments notice. Everything we have is designed to be mobile to a certain extent. H-AT kits are an easy, portable way to attack armor and who knows how many millions of dollars the world's nations have spent making tanks faster, and able to gun on the move with all the auto loaders and gun stabilization systems.

                Things have to move, otherwise you will, at some point, be a sitting duck for an enemy tank, chopper, laser or GPS guided bomb, or even a H-AT kit in the hands of an enemy trooper. If a one man tank could be as effective as a two or three man tank, then I would have no issue with it. But even since vBF2 the fact of the matter has been that a properly coordinated two or three man tanker crew will always be more effective than a l one man tank. This is now a million times more true now that there is the delay between switching positions in the tank. You may play 10,000 matches before a scenario that makes a one man tank a feasible option comes around but I guarantee you it will only take one match to show you it isn't an option.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: 1 man vehicles in 0.7

                  Dang! I was sitting there typing that earlier and thinking "should I say this?" when I didn't have the time to really lay out a good example to kind of paint a picture.

                  I don't consider myself an asset-waster, I hope you guys dont think so because of this post. 99% of the time you need both/driver and gunner. (Actually, that and a team full of good guys is best.) But once in a while, like Tigger and Randy said there is a reason. Maybe the only other reason I can think of is if my commander ordered me into a tank by myself and told me to shut up and follow orders.

                  Never would I support stupid motoring around or whatever in Tanks/APC's with just one crew risking an asset.

                  Masterjack, I had great fun driving for you the other night, and yes things like what you mentioned about Kashin, though a tank sure is out in the open there when it supports from the hills. But its scenarios kinda of like that that I'm wondering about.

                  I know alot of this has been discussed already in the past in the forum, I'm guessing with me thinking that things seem to go slower and more deliberately in my 0.7 experience so far, we might be able to find a way to use the vehicles differently.

                  Pure tank squads supporting pure infantry squads is what Im getting from you guys. Teamspeak coordinating all possibly ? But, for a few minutes, when because of your skilled team having the situation somewhat at hand, and your leaders instructions, would that extra body on the ground forward be a help ?

                  You know tho, I can also see me looking at this from the idea of just what level and by what means is the infantry and tank/apc coordination best carried out given the 0.7 update and the tools at hand. Holy smoke are pure tank/apc squads better than multiple tank/apc and infantry squads??? Is VOIP in one mixed squad better than TS helping to coordinate sperate 'pure' squads ??? At this tactical level we really need to have the infantry and armor closely coordinated. How do you guys feel about that now that 0.7 is out ?

                  To me, 0.7 more than ever requires us to slow down and do things in an even more thought out way than before. Actually now... Im even less likely to risk an asset of such value than ever before.

                  These PR-TG thoughts ... they won't let me go...

                  Im on fire here with ideas tonight, if it gets quiet enough here im hoping to get on TS and look for you guys.

                  Is there or has anyone ever thought of a regularly scheduled TG-PR Teasmspeak meeting night ? We could have them set aside just for talking about these kind of things verbally. Like a new topic every week or something ? Does that exist ?

                  |

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: 1 man vehicles in 0.7

                    Originally posted by Elwenil View Post
                    You may play 10,000 matches before a scenario that makes a one man tank a feasible option comes around but I guarantee you it will only take one match to show you it isn't an option.
                    Elwenil.... Am I chasing something here ? You really got me with that statement.
                    Last edited by Warlab; 01-07-2008, 07:46 PM. Reason: spellin'

                    |

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: 1 man vehicles in 0.7

                      ONLY reason why I would even remotely say it to be a possibly good excuse is if the gunner or driver does get s disconnect and the rest of the squad are already in armor or doing something useful to help the armor out. As I explained in my reply above. I felt so out of place not having a driver and switching between the driver and gunner seat had me nervous cause I know I could not maneuver fast enough if enemy armor or even an enemy with HAT or C4 decided to sneak up on me. But I also do not feel it wise to abandon ship and just leave a perfectly good APC sitting either just cause my driver was disconnected. That is one thing that does make me mad, seeing someone bail from a perfectly good vehicle just to be gunned down on foot and then the vehicle just sits there not being of any use to the team til it does finally get destroyed and respawns.
                      Granted I might not have been very effective but I was willing and always am willing to stay in the vehicle to make sure it does go down and our team will at least have it spawn later instead of just sitting there. Very great chance nobody will ever get another crewman kit and work their way back to that vehicle to put it back to good use again.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: 1 man vehicles in 0.7

                        Another reason why 1 man crew on tank does not work so well is, the elevation of the turret is low compared to the apc.

                        This means its hard to find cover that would allow just the turret to pop over the top like the tank bunkers you see on EJOD, even they are not perfect cover as the enemy can look down on those.

                        There were 4 tanks at main base on quinling so I took one out, the village is overlooked by hills. You might try poking the turret out and giving some covering fire vs the hostiles crossing the bridge, it doesnt exactly work though. Especially if the apache decides you should die


                        If you find yourself in a fair fight, then you have obviously failed to plan properly.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: 1 man vehicles in 0.7

                          Originally posted by Sabre_Tooth_Tigger View Post
                          Especially if the apache decides you should die
                          How do you all feel about the AA now ? That still seems like anytime AIR decides you die... you die. I've never AA'd in 0.7

                          |

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: 1 man vehicles in 0.7

                            AA is great now. The ones with the problem are the pilots. Not because of lack of skill, but because of complacency. Simply put: they got used to crappy AA in 0.6. In this version, the second you hear the lock tone, you HAVE to drop flares or you're toast. If the AA guy fires his missile at you before your flares pop, it's death for aircraft. If you pop flares first, the lock breaks and you get away free. Pilots are used to being able to drop flares at any given point before, during or after the AA missile has been fired and it would cause a miss. Not anymore!

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: 1 man vehicles in 0.7

                              as for 1 man tanks - i think only in extreme circumstances you should try this (have a crapload of tanks sitting around and you need a good stationary defense).

                              personally i dislike mixing armor with infantry squads. it makes VOIP extremely congested and confusing, and the squad leader is conflicted about giving orders to both the vehicle and the infantry at the same time.

                              on EJOD a few nights ago i was in a tank supporting Ferris' squad and we did great work together, as i followed him and protected against armor threats and he took care of securing objectives and clearing out infantry... i think that is a better way of doing things as each squad has a task and can focus on it, mutually supporting each other.

                              a 6 man squad is just too small to break up infantry.

                              for APCs, i prefer them to be in seperate squads as well but at this time i hardly ever see APCs used correctly so i think 1 man in an APC is still okay, but not optimal.

                              if you ever see me in an APC and your an infantry squad, just type to me in game and i will support you 100%, will give you fire, meds and quick safe transport.

                              the APC's in v0.7 are ALOT less vulnerable now, and its nice that the driver has a zoom so he can scan for targets when the vehicle is in a stationary supporting position

                              Comment

                              Connect

                              Collapse

                              TeamSpeak 3 Server

                              Collapse

                              Advertisement

                              Collapse

                              Twitter Feed

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X