Seperate tank drivers from tank gunners.

Part of why tanks are always the best option is because they only need one person to operate, this suggestion is a pretty simple (at least from the players perspective, no idea about implementation) way to make tanks actually require a trade off instead of just having tanks be 100% upsides with no negative aspects.

 

We should really set a rule for this section.
You have to play at least 500 hours before you post any kind of suggestion.

Alright, I'll still reply you with a bit seriousness.

Tell me why should we stop making tanks the best option?
Because you fail at killing it?

 

Because that's how you save a dying game, make sure it's as far from common sense as possible.

Because I want infantry to matter.

They should still be useful, but tanks shouldn't be the only thing that matters. Right now there is no reason other than cost to not use a tank.

 

Play Red Orchestra 1. There is a distinct difference between the driver and the shooter.

How does everyone play Red Orchestra 1? You get a tank, drive towards a place and then you sit there shooting the enemy. If you want tanks to be easier to kill as infantry, don't make tanks boring to use, make it easier for the infantry to kill them with homing rpgs, more damage with stickies, less armour plates for the tanks, etc. Or you're going to have weird tanks with people screaming like idiots when someone enters their tank when a noob saw the tip of "you can have two people in a tank".

Just saying, it's good that you want change, but try to add change that makes the game better rather than just "change because".

 

Fair point, but you could make switching seats have a small cooldown to make that less practical

I don't want easier to kill tanks, I want less tactically useful tanks.

again, that all depends on how it is implemented.

It's not really "change because", tanks in empires need to still be powerful and awesome, but having 1 man 'commando' tanks really makes infantry useless and also discourages teamwork.

 

I've never been a fan of indirect fire in games. To me games are based on interaction and if someone is just sitting in the back of a map and shooting erryone it's not really that fun for anyone involved. I honestly wouldn't mind arty being removed or replaced with a more direct support vehicle.

 

We could also make light/medium tanks only require one person to make them more useful so it's not just a race for heavies.

 

Then nerf the nukes, nerf the damage weapons do, nerf their armour, etc. Don't do a "I think playing as infantry is more fun than tanks, therefore tanks should be boring and annoying to play".

Also, the clusterfuck on slaughtered when people have to keep changing seats to fire and to move. Oh boi the rage.

 

I still want tanks to be powerful and have a big effect on everything around them, but if they required 2 people to use effectively it would nerf them in a strategic sense but they would still be awesome to use.

Requiring teamwork =/= boring and annoying to play. Also drivers could have a smaller weapon slot dedicated to them, maybe an mg.

The clusterfuck would encourage people to ride as gunners.

 

A+ reply, would quote again.

 

But that was what I said in the first post, that the tanks in Red Orchestra have two seats, but most people still use them alone.

Would you use these tanks?

 

And I proposed a simple solution, make switching seats have a cool down or take some time so people aren't just running around solo in a tank.

 

You just fail at both teamwork and infantry.
So it's prefectly fine for you to get raped by vehicles, young man.

You have absolutely no idea how powerful is the combination of just one decent engi and one decent gren, only nuke can effectively fuck this combination. Not to mention if we have a larger combination.

In the beginning & mid phase of a round, Gren is still quite deadly because RPG&mowtar eats like 2 plates of armor for each shot, mines are pretty much dead sentence for vehicles, and vehicles aren't effective at infantry-killing at this point.
It's called the development of a round, infantry should be less useful in the late game.

Also, in a recent PUG, I remained as a rifleman walking on the ground for the entire round and I didn't feel tanks are overwhelming me, partially because sticky grenade is powerful.
But it's mainly because we had this perfect teamwork between infantry&vehicles, which I assume you can't imagine.

Thus, a bunch of infantry cooperated won't get raped by a bunch of vehicles.
Your argument is invalid.

 

Having a good teamwork game once in every 50 doesn't mean there's no problem.

 

Once in every 50?
I don't see this exaggerated argument is a valid argument.
The argument in your argument is invalid, thus your argument is invalid.

If one side can't teamwork, why should they win?

Infantry aren't as useless as you think they are, in every round.

 

One double and even ONE >>>TRIPLE<<< POST.

Fuck yeah suggestion forum.

@ontopic: my opinion about suggestion:

'ts shit.