Tanks on Enhanced

[Fugitz]

The Question i asked myself recently is: Is the usage of Tanks forbidden by some unspoken law? I mean i have been playing on Enhanced for more than half a year now and it did not happen more than 5 times that a tank was used in a mission although there were reports of heavily armed forced at the area of the objective. Following, we got completly devestated. Because i have to respect the decision of the Command, i didnt ask them during the mission, but want to do it here and now. So like i said: Why is there almost no Tank/IFV usage at Enhanced?

[Colsta]

Because they require a specific team to use - Torch or Hammer - which require high numbers of players on the server.
More specifically, it requires enough numbers to have both Alpha and Bravo full, as well as a Platoon Commander.

[Noah_Hero]

26 minutes ago, Fugitz said:

The Question i asked myself recently is: Is the usage of Tanks forbidden by some unspoken law?

No, just limited by written law (https://forums.ahoyworld.net/topic/7678-ahoyworld-enhanced-rules-and-guidelines/)

 

 

26 minutes ago, Fugitz said:

The Question i asked myself recently is: Is the usage of Tanks forbidden by some unspoken law?

If you have played here for that time you should (at least) by now know the rules. And the rules are quite simple and clear on that specific topic: To use Hammer and/or Torch Alpha has to be filled, a Platoon Commander has to be online and there have to be enough other infantry players online so that Bravo could be filled. That means that you will need a total of 25 infantry people (including the Platoon Commander) before you can use Hammer and/or Torch. But theoretically the Commander in Charge could call in people to use Hammer and/or Torch before this limit is reached.

 

26 minutes ago, Fugitz said:

although there were reports of heavily armed forced at the area of the objective

Then there probably was a MAT and/or HAT online for example since the units spawning at an AO do consider how many and wich BLUFOR units are active (at the start of the AO). So if you fill Hammer and/or Torch before an AO starts there would be even more "heavily armed forces".

 

26 minutes ago, Fugitz said:

Following, we got completly devestated.

That could happen when MAT and/or HAT for example disconnects after the AO has started since then there are these "heavily armed forces" but the BLUFOR counterunit for them isn´t existing anymore.

 

26 minutes ago, Fugitz said:

Because i have to respect the decision of the Command, i didnt ask them during the mission, but want to do it here and now.

Good attitude!

[Ryko]

There are a variety of reasons tanks don't get used a lot.

 

1) Tanks on their own can devastate a mission when that mission is intended for infantry, so it's not that interesting unless there are a lot of players on, whereby the mission automatically scales up and adds additional enemy armour units.  Tanks become a bit more useful then.

 

2) If a mission is 10 klicks away from the base, it can take you a long time to get from base to the mission.

 

3) Most players just aren't that experienced at using a tank, and end up getting wrecked.  Ie., charge into combat because you think you're invincible, get destroyed by a single anti-tank soldier because you didn't see him.

 

4) Most players enjoy infantry combat over vehicle combat, so even finding enough players to get a tank squad going can be a challenge.

 

That said, you are certainly welcome to ask to use a tank, even if Alpha and Bravo aren't filled: Platoon Command or Alpha Squad Lead is empowered to flex the standard unit composition rules if it's beneficial to the players' enjoyment of the mission, or just makes sense to do so.  As well, any vehicle which doesn't require a commander, or has a heavy barrel gun, can be used as a transport vehicle - this includes most of the new Strykers.

[Fugitz]

Alright so i get the point, that for many players, tanks can either destroy the mission experience for others or for themselfes. But i would really welcome certain Missions which would not necessary require Armored warfare, but would emphasize players to use vehicles. I think vehicle warfare is something, which isnt played much on Enhanced although it can be very much fun.

[Colsta]

Gamenights can fill that niche, and they have in the past.

[Guest]

Quote

I think vehicle warfare is something, which isnt played much on Enhanced although it can be very much fun.

The reason for there being little vehicular warfare is because it is something that is very hard to balance. If you have a tank that is against infantry then it is slaughter. But if you add more tanks to the AO then the infantry on your side will get slaughtered. It is very difficult to find the sweet spot between enough tanks for you to shoot at but not enough that they get to run a rampage on all of the friendly infantry on the ground. 

[Fugitz]

Alright, now i get why tanks are not used that often. I knew about the Player Limit for Tank usage, but because i recently overheard that the Commander in Charge can use Tanks if its appropriate for him, he is allowed to do so, that was the main reason i asked.

 

[Karate Pyjamas]

Your requests don't go unheard, I will look into a mission scenario with Tanks where appropriate.

[SiegeSix]

Alright,

I would love to lower the requirements too. I agree with all points there made for and against.

 

Now, I found (in the parameters) an option to add more vehicles. "Special Ambient," is normally set to low. Increase this and tank crews may be of use?

[Amentes]

When Tanks or IFVs are used, they invariably end up dead very early on. It has in the past been extremely rare for a tank to not end up destroyed, leaving the infantry to deal with the remaining units that spawned in AO due to the use of a tank. This often makes for a very poor infantry experience.

 

Adding more Armor to an AO when tanks are in use will not fix that problem

[Miczils]

When Tanks or IFVs are used, they invariably end up dead very early on. It has in the past been extremely rare for a tank to not end up destroyed, leaving the infantry to deal with the remaining units that spawned in AO due to the use of a tank. This often makes for a very poor infantry experience.

 

Adding more Armor to an AO when tanks are in use will not fix that problem [emoji14]

 

Sadly I have to agree with that, quite often tanks / ifvs aren't used how they should be, sometimes because of what command want's, sometimes because of the crew. I know more than a few people I'd go hammer with, every day , it's just the player requirements and experience / proper training for players less experienced in armor. (New training idea? )

[Fugitz]

5 hours ago, Miczils said:

 

Proper training for players less experienced in armor. (New training idea? )

I would welcome training sessions for Tank-Units. I am only used to the vanilla tanks which differ from the ones we have on Enhanced because there isnt much usage of them. 

[Noah_Hero]

11 hours ago, SiegeSix said:

I would love to lower the requirements

Definitly not because of:

8 hours ago, Amentes said:

When Tanks or IFVs are used, they invariably end up dead very early on. It has in the past been extremely rare for a tank to not end up destroyed, leaving the infantry to deal with the remaining units that spawned in AO due to the use of a tank. This often makes for a very poor infantry experience.

 

 

 

5 hours ago, Miczils said:

proper training for players less experienced in armor. (New training idea? )

 

2 minutes ago, Fugitz said:

I would welcome training sessions for Tank-Units.

I don´t think training sessions should be needed for that. I mean yes it would be nice but all that stuff can be found on Youtube and doesnt needs a special training session...like flying.

[Miczils]

I don´t think training sessions should be needed for that. I mean yes it would be nice but all that stuff can be found on Youtube and doesnt needs a special training session...like flying.

 

I agree that pretty much everything can be learnt on YouTube, but following that, honestly everything that we allready have a training of can be found on YouTube, from squad leading, through flight, basic combat tactics and eod, ending at operating a mortar with nothing but ACE map tools.

[Noah_Hero]

10 minutes ago, Miczils said:

 

I agree that pretty much everything can be learnt on YouTube, but following that, honestly everything that we allready have a training of can be found on YouTube, from squad leading, through flight, basic combat tactics and eod, ending at operating a mortar with nothing but ACE map tools.

Definitly but if someone is performing bad in a tank because he didn´t wanted to spend time on learning then you can just tell him to get back into Alpha/Brave, etc. But if someone is performing bad as a simple rifleman because he is not willing to spend time on watching youtube videos then you can´t get him an easier role because there just is nothing more simple. To prevent that the community gets filled up by people like that you can either apply administrative sanctions to sort them out or you do basic trainings like the ones wich are done now.

But everything that involves more than these basics-trainings is just too much in my opinion since you should be able to expect that someone who wants to drive a tank is willing to learn how to do so on his own...and if he is not then just don´t let him drive anymore.

[Fugitz]

44 minutes ago, Noah_Hero said:

But everything that involves more than these basics-trainings is just too much in my opinion since you should be able to expect that someone who wants to drive a tank is willing to learn how to do so on his own...and if he is not then just don´t let him drive anymore.

The problem here is: People like myself who dont have any friends who play Arma might have trouble getting used to tanks when they cant get a routine in it. Certainly you can watch videos on YouTube, read guides, etc. but in my opinion learning by doing is the most effective way to learn something. And you cant use AI in usermade missions for that because you cant realy communicate with the AI. But communication is very important, especially in a tank very you have to rely on others and talk to them to be usefull as a unit. So to come back to the topic: If we want "elite" tank-crews we have to give people the chance to get a routine on a tank.

[Ryko]

Fugitz, I agree with you - it's a problem that will only get perpetuated if people don't get experience in the roles.  I would say if the mission justifies it, don't hesitate to ask whoever is in charge if you can form a tank squad, you might find some reception to the idea.

 

If the mission's 13 km away from base though, don't be surprised if the c/o wants to insert by helicopter.

[fir_nev]

On 7/4/2017 at 2:58 AM, Fugitz said:

Is the usage of Tanks forbidden by some unspoken law?

 

No but the level of coordination can be taxing for us who are not trained in tank warfare. Even if there is noone to command, we normally will travel light and have MAT as our heaviest hitter.

[Fugitz]

1 hour ago, Ryko said:

If the mission's 13 km away from base though, don't be surprised if the c/o wants to insert by helicopter.

I can totally understand if someone doesnt want to take 1 hour just to get to the AO

[SiegeSix]

Tank crews doesn't require experience to operate the tank. But disciplin and positioning. This is done over the radio with two careful listeners - The Commanding Officer & Tank Commander. 

 

You can learn to operate a tank (targeting system, driving etc.) in the Virtuel Arsenal at the main menu.

 

With my personal opinion on it, here are my pros and cons:

Pros:

• Something new and exciting is gonna be available
• More mobile and armored AT unit will be at disposal
• Extra firepower in the AO
• Can sit some distance away and provide overwatch and suppressing fire on the enemy
• Can be a more advanced transport unit
• Can commandeer the MC Mk. 19 Stryker and operate both a 120mm Mortar tube and a Mk. 19

 

Cons: 

• Might take some time to get used to
• Commanders might not know how to use them efficient 
• Tank crew may go AWOL or disobey orders creating clusterf*** in the AO
• Might not know the vehicle they are using prehandedly
• Might not communicate that well together

 

Again, these are MY personal opinions!

[Amentes]

I guess I'd say step one would be getting a few of the people who are interested in running Armor together and running the Bohemia-made Altis scenario through a few times.

 

That should be a decent training exercise in itself, but it only covers Armor use in open terrain. Things become much more complex when you're moving into dense or urban terrain, in which the Tank becomes very vulnerable to enemy attack even when abusing 3rd person.

 

Honestly, it's not just about getting the Armor crews in shape. Working with and around Armor requires expertise on the part of the Infantry as well.

[Noah_Hero]

Just now, Amentes said:

Things become much more complex when you're moving into dense or urban terrain, in which the Tank becomes very vulnerable to enemy attack

Well thats why you just don´t get MBTs in these areas when you know that the enemy has rockets Not in Arma and not in RL

 

But totally on your side with all the other things.

 

[SiegeSix]

3 hours ago, Noah_Hero said:

Well thats why you just don´t get MBTs in these areas when you know that the enemy has rockets Not in Arma and not in RL

 

But totally on your side with all the other things.

 

 

Tank Crews can man a Stryker, Bradley or any other IFV/APC?

[Noah_Hero]

Just now, SiegeSix said:

Tank Crews can man a Stryker, Bradley or any other IFV/APC?

Yes they can but even these ones aren´t made for going into urban terrain if the enemy has rockets. but if you actually do bring them in such a situation then it´s basically their death-sentence since one guy with an RPG is enough to ruin your day.