Trying to picture actual tank tactics

[WorldOfForms]

This is not a debate about driver/gunner, etc. This is about trying to imagine how we will drive tanks, considering what we know about them.

The part that has me most confused is how we are going to retreat from combat, as the rear of the tank is the vulnerable part. If I engage a large number of enemies on a relatively stable frontline of combat, what happens when I need to retreat? Won't turning to escape get me killed by exposing my backside? This is assuming I'm not in a magrider.

It seems like the best tactic in a large fight will be to attempt hull-down placement or just peeking out from behind obstacles and then backing up almost as soon as you take fire. The old methods of weaving around and driving off over hills probably won't work anymore.

We'll have to play to see if this is a good or bad thing. Am I missing anything? How do you think tanks will have to position and maneuver considering the low TTK and the vulnerable rear?

[Figment]

http://wiki.worldoftanks.com/Tactics

^ any in the link above not related to stealth or crackpot.

Plus your own.

My personal favourite is flank a group of enemies alone and try turning the hulls of your opponent to your allies. They will be preoccupied with preventing YOU to hit their side and rear and forget about your allies sniping down the road. Meaning they'll try to keep their front pointed at YOU (but you are now where their behinds used to be, with their fronts aimed at you, meaning their behinds are where their fronts used to be). Meaning your allies will then all hit their softer sides, you giggle and drive off (don't forget to giggle!).

[Infernalis]

Just like in Battlefield, the TTK isn't so low that you can't have tactics and maneuvers, all the opposite (I mostly talk about the old BF with big maps).

As for retreat if you're somewhere where you can't hide from your opponent quickly you reverse with the front of your armor pointed in the direction of your enemy so you don't take additional damage and you either : remember the map so you don't hit a rock or something, turn the turret so you can navigate and avoid obstacles and/or turn the 3rd person view if there's one.

And you can aim accurately while driving in another direction btw.

[IgloGlass]

http://wiki.worldoftanks.com/Tactics

^ any in the link above not related to stealth or crackpot.

Plus your own.

My personal favourite is flank a group of enemies alone and try turning the hulls of your opponent to your allies. They will be preoccupied with preventing YOU to hit their side and rear and forget about your allies sniping down the road. Meaning they'll try to keep their front pointed at YOU (but you are now where their behinds used to be, with their fronts aimed at you, meaning their behinds are where their fronts used to be). Meaning your allies will then all hit their softer sides, you giggle and drive off (don't forget to giggle!).

This I really have to try!

[SgtExo]

Reverse until you find some cover or a depression where you can turn and retreat at full speed.

[Khellendros]

Reversing might not be very viable if reverse speeds are similar to PS1, you'd never get anywhere.

[Blackwolf]

This is not a debate about driver/gunner, etc. This is about trying to imagine how we will drive tanks, considering what we know about them.

The part that has me most confused is how we are going to retreat from combat, as the rear of the tank is the vulnerable part. If I engage a large number of enemies on a relatively stable frontline of combat, what happens when I need to retreat? Won't turning to escape get me killed by exposing my backside? This is assuming I'm not in a magrider.

It seems like the best tactic in a large fight will be to attempt hull-down placement or just peeking out from behind obstacles and then backing up almost as soon as you take fire. The old methods of weaving around and driving off over hills probably won't work anymore.

We'll have to play to see if this is a good or bad thing. Am I missing anything? How do you think tanks will have to position and maneuver considering the low TTK and the vulnerable rear?

The rear isn't any more vulnerable then the front. The only real difference is you can't return fire, and if retreat is being considered, returning fire isn't really going to do you any good anyway. Better to focus on maneuvering and forcing your opponent to constantly adjust his aim on the fly while driving through obstacle fields.

With the way PS2 is doing things, the most common tactics for tanks will be stationary artillery points, few shots will be done on the move and that is killing one of the biggest advantages (and the core reason behind the invention) of tanks. Mobile warfare isn't going to be very mobile, unless you are good at what you do.

This means that tanks will be more vulnerable to infantry, which is what they attempted to do with BFRs. The DEVs are aiming for a full circle of rock-paper-scissors but it will inevitably be a triangle with Air Cav being on top (which, coincidentally, is exactly like RL and exactly the way things should be anyway).

As for in-game tactics, you can plot and plan but until we get in the game, there's no real point.

[Rivenshield]

I've been noodling around trying to figure out how we can take advantage of the Prowler's better speed.... and I like the idea of a Mossie coordinating two groups of Prowlers, steering them by verbal commands on either side of an unsuspecting enemy column, and telling them when to turn towards each other at top speed.

All of a sudden, TANKS ERRYWHERE!

[Baneblade]

We will be compiling a publication on this very subject at some point in the near future.

[aleksandrgrc]

i will drive one of those tanks with you, seems obvious your a loyal citizen.

im way better at driving than gunning. when i got hooked on infantry back in 2001. thats where i was at 911. anyways i fell in love with driving the tanks on account i moved them out of fire with a natural grace but mannaged to stay in the fight and let the gunner rack up the kills. i liked that 4 wheeled mrv art tank, owned with that thing. im not really going anywhere with this. i just wanted to feel like i was apart of something .

[GodsMessenger]

There used to be a really good tanker guide for PS1 uploaded to this site somewhere. It was called the tank bible, by a guy named theredx. That guy used to roll some crazy tank platoons.

[StumpyTheOzzie]

The most important thing is to outnumber your enemy and concentrate on one target. Once they are destroyed you can retreat for repairs. And I've always found that doing quick patrols on the fringe of the zerg keeps you safe.

[WorldOfForms]

The rear isn't any more vulnerable then the front.

What? The devs have said/shown tons of times that tanks have vulnerable armor in the rear.

[Littleman]

The rear isn't any more vulnerable then the front.

Actually, in PS2, it is. You don't want to get hit in the rear.

[Marinealver]

Tanks would be either used as a grinder slowly pushing back resistance with firepower or as a punch through the enemy lines to get a vital objective.

[Sabot]

Two words: Ghost Division.

[CheeZeX]

Back in the day on Emerald NC I ran a tank outfit called ReD RuM Inc.

We would constantly field between 10-30 tanks at a given time.

The best tactics we used was surveying the incoming terrain and setting waypoints as to where the high ground / low ground were. Once you have this tactical advantage (and support to go with it from lodes/SGs) enemy forces really do just crumble.

Plus its always smart to have a backup / escape route planned.

[Memeotis]

Assuming you're outnumbered 10 to 30, but you have the advantage of knowing where the column is going to come driving, you could have your ten tanks behind a hill, and then you could work together with the infiltrator to shower them with a relatively precise barrage of shells... before they can even see you.

[twistnlick]

Trying to picture actual tank tactics

From what's been seen on the videos so far: very few/none.

[Landtank]

I'm going to go with the magical little button "S"

That allows you to reverse!

As for actual tank battles and tactics, I'm really excited/curious to see how it plays out with the relatively low amount of shots each tank can sustain, but at the same time the idea of 30+ tanks shelling each other from a quarter mile away makes me all giddy inside.

I suspect flanking will really be the only viable tactic, but hopefully, MAYBE, there will actually be viable tactics based upon each tanks strengths.

Example, from history of course!

The Crusader was a British tank deployed in North Africa, it was very fast but lightly armored and armed. They went against Panzer IIIs, which had better range and armor.

Crusader=Prowler, Panzer III=Vanguard.

In order to negate the enemies advantage, the Prowler shall charge the enemy, closing the distance with their great speed, and then attempting to use their maneuverability to destroy the Vanguards. This is exactly what happened in WW2!!!

Sounds EpIcZzZz to me

[Buggsy]

If there are squad on squad spawning, and Galaxy spawning, than the only "tank tactics" that will exist would be to hunt galaxies down and shoot in random directions.

There won't be any tank vs tank battles in between bases because you won't have to defend bringing your AMS's up.

[Landtank]

If there are squad on squad spawning, and Galaxy spawning, than the only "tank tactics" that will exist would be to hunt galaxies down and shoot in random directions.

There won't be any tank vs tank battles in between bases because you won't have to defend bringing your AMS's up.

Disagree, the best counter to an armored column is another armored column! If you show up to a fight without tanks, and the other team has tanks, you lose. Especially if even one of those tanks is equipped with AA.

[SixShooter]

If there are squad on squad spawning, and Galaxy spawning, than the only "tank tactics" that will exist would be to hunt galaxies down and shoot in random directions.

There won't be any tank vs tank battles in between bases because you won't have to defend bringing your AMS's up.

Oh, well okay then. I guess you've summed it up and there is no point in even trying. Move along everyone, nothing to discuss here...:rolleyes:

[Buggsy]

Disagree, the best counter to an armored column is another armored column! If you show up to a fight without tanks, and the other team has tanks, you lose. Especially if even one of those tanks is equipped with AA.

Everything revolves around the spawn point. Since the infantry spawn point (galaxy) can fly then the only way to defend that spawn point is with more air. Tanks are going to be useless.

[GreatMazinkaise]

@Landtank: I think that the Prowler actually has higher damage output than the Vanny (assuming that both shots hit and that the reload times are similar), so I wouldn't go discounting the firepower of the Black Dreamcast of Death just yet...

[StumpyTheOzzie]

They may be useless, bit I'm still gonna have mad fun driving them around looking for the other useless drivers in their useless tanks and shooting the crap out of each other, while protected by useless? AA tanks and useless engineer drivers.

Not everything has to have a purpose. This is about fun first, then efficiency.

[Landtank]

@Landtank: I think that the Prowler actually has higher damage output than the Vanny (assuming that both shots hit and that the reload times are similar), so I wouldn't go discounting the firepower of the Black Dreamcast of Death just yet...

I think it will be the same if both shots hit, maybe a tad higher, but I always assumed that if they both sat there shooting each other then the Vanguard would win, since that's what it is designed for :D

[SixShooter]

They may be useless, bit I'm still gonna have mad fun driving them around looking for the other useless drivers in their useless tanks and shooting the crap out of each other, while protected by useless? AA tanks and useless engineer drivers.

Not everything has to have a purpose. This is about fun first, then efficiency.

I also look forward to driving useless tanks and killing the shit out of other useless tanks and any other useless vehicles and useless infantry that I see. It sounds like a useless good time!:cheers:

[StumpyTheOzzie]

I also look forward to driving useless tanks and killing the shit out of other useless tanks and any other useless vehicles and useless infantry that I see. It sounds like a useless good time!:cheers:

But you're vanu!

Maybe we can roll together? Make an outfit? You don't NEED outfits. So they're useless too.

And cuz nobody will be driving tanks, maybe we could go for dual AV maxes as well! Cuz they're DUAL useless.

[Landtank]

But you're vanu!

Maybe we can roll together? Make an outfit? You don't NEED outfits. So they're useless too.

And cuz nobody will be driving tanks, maybe we could go for dual AV maxes as well! Cuz they're DUAL useless.

2x the uselessness, 2x the cool.

Can't wait for these damn tank battles..

[SixShooter]

But you're vanu!

Maybe we can roll together? Make an outfit? You don't NEED outfits. So they're useless too.

And cuz nobody will be driving tanks, maybe we could go for dual AV maxes as well! Cuz they're DUAL useless.

2x the uselessness, 2x the cool.

Can't wait for these damn tank battles..

With all us usless tank pilots we could form a useless platoon and take over the useless continent!:rofl:

In regards to the OP, It will should be possible to find cover (at least temporarily) without having to expose your weak backside. You'll really just need to be aware of your surrondings and hopefully not be by yourself so someone can cover your escape. I'll be in a Magrider so I won't have this problem;) Also, why are we trying to run from the fight?:lol:

[Figment]

Shame most of you aren't actually discussing (PS2 specific) tank tactics, basic (see link in second post) or advanced tactics in general. At least, there's so much more you can do and predict. :x


However, where it comes to specific PS2 tactics, we're going to have to talk about minefields. Specifically, Sunderers vs minefields. Like we did in PS1, we'll have Sunderers with Anti-Minefield modules leading the charge over a bridge or other area where we can expect heavy minefields and blocking fire from reaching our tanks.

Then there's the weather and day-night cycle. Let's talk night combat. Imagine you roll in under the cover of darkness and use your headlights to startle and blind your enemies like bunnies on the road. It'll give you a fraction of a second more to fire and make them miss. Especially if you can make the contrast between dark and headlights turning on significant (eyes have to adjust - can also try flashing it on and off and sending someone in a spasm, but I'm not sure if that's designed as intended :p).

Will you want to retreat at times? Hell yes. Bait and ambush tactics are great under the cover of darkness and fog. Turn off your headlights, wait with a group of tanks in a crossfire setup, have one tank fire from a distance and retreat in between you. Let them pass, then engage them from side and behind.

It's always going to be very important to maximise the amount of shots you can get off before they can turn and get a shot on you. So any chance you have at taking your enemies cannon away from your friendlies is going to increase the time your allies have for firing shots. Once you ally reaches a 180 degrees position from you with the tank in the middle, you should have already won, regardless of how much firepower or endurance that tank in the middle has, it should never be able to lay a finger on your ally.

With large numbers of tanks like we'll see in PS2, group tactics may involve hit and run by sections of your outfit. The moment the first group is almost spend, they retreat and repair behind a hill while the new group comes over the hill during the other group's retreat, who shield the retreating tanks and continue their fire. Especially useful since you unfortunately won't need a full team compliment in your units to have them fire. This way you can sustain the entire group for a longer period of time.

Blitzkrieg will probably be quite normal. Meaning you have groups mash through the first line of enemies and then turn to create a crossfire.

Wth regards to difference in vehicle types, Magriders and Vanguards will want to stick to tight corridors more than Prowlers, since Prowlers will need space to maneuvre. When being engaged from the front, a Mag can use strafing while backing up to keep the enemy in front of them and from preventing it to back up (see WoT tactics links regarding preventing flanking and using flanking in second post and include strafing in it).

etc. etc. etc.

etc.

and etc.

[wraithverge]

There used to be a really good tanker guide for PS1 uploaded to this site somewhere. It was called the tank bible, by a guy named theredx. That guy used to roll some crazy tank platoons.

I believe I used to be in that outfit (bad memory for names) dogs of war. It was mostly about speed control, positioning and firing arcs, we rarely got to the point where we had multiple fists. However those were based on RL tanks, for this game the rear arc would have to be covered by the secondary guns.

I imagine for the most part it will be hit and run tactics for dedicated tank outfits, if they get mixed outfits you will start seeing firing lines forming backed by engineers on foot and bursters covering the skies. We'll have to see =)

For lone tankers you will see them being mobile artillery from the back of the battle, the modern long bowmen so to speak if they wish to keep their tanks.

Since they brought back mowing you may also see them as a speed counter to entrenched infantry with medics, charge in rally and retreat for repairs.

[fvdham]

There was a rather large tank battle in PlanetSide 1 yesterday.
At least 30 tanks.

It seems some outfit provided lodestar vehicle reapair units in the center
and formed a very wide line of Prowler MBT's in front of it.

And there were lightnings and skyguards skirmishing, advancing to the front for hit and run
and next cover behind the Prowler tanks.
Often luring solo enemy tanks to the Prowler line.

There was also a cloaked troop transport which sneak deployed rocket soldiers
near enemy BFR's.

[Symmenix]

I believe long distance shelling of bases could be done if you have a field man saying where to aim.

Ie. Multiple kilos away from the fight, you aim and shell their base.

[Baneblade]

I don't have the heart to tell my outfit they are useless, so we will just drive tanks.

[RoninOni]

The rear isn't any more vulnerable then the front. The only real difference is you can't return fire, and if retreat is being considered, returning fire isn't really going to do you any good anyway. Better to focus on maneuvering and forcing your opponent to constantly adjust his aim on the fly while driving through obstacle fields.

With the way PS2 is doing things, the most common tactics for tanks will be stationary artillery points, few shots will be done on the move and that is killing one of the biggest advantages (and the core reason behind the invention) of tanks. Mobile warfare isn't going to be very mobile, unless you are good at what you do.

This means that tanks will be more vulnerable to infantry, which is what they attempted to do with BFRs. The DEVs are aiming for a full circle of rock-paper-scissors but it will inevitably be a triangle with Air Cav being on top (which, coincidentally, is exactly like RL and exactly the way things should be anyway).

As for in-game tactics, you can plot and plan but until we get in the game, there's no real point.
?? I think you need a refresher

PS2 does indeed sport locational damage on tanks. Rear hits will cause more damage then side, which cause more damage than front. Hopefully they also factor in angle of hit as direct hits should hit harder than glancing

Secondly... you can turn your turret independent of tank direction (unless your Vanu in which case you can strafe whatever direction you need while facing target) so you very much can retreat driving backwards to protect your weakspot and have your turret either facing the direction you're traveling so you don't hit obstacles and swivel around towards the front of the tank to fire at people chasing you

[WorldOfForms]

I don't see how a blitzkrieg could work. Here's what I see: you smash through the front line, and then your weak rear armor is now exposed to the line you just smashed through, assuming you didn't kill everything in that front line.

But let's say you did kill everything. Now what? You're at close range with enemies at the new the front line. You'll be slaughtered unless you retreat. But if you retreat... there's that exposed rear again.

That's why I'm saying that the PS1 tank driving, where you approach the front line, take shots on the move, and then circle back toward your own troops won't work. The moment you circle back, you're hosed, unless you can perfectly position yourself to always be near cover the moment you turn around.

People keep bringing up mobile tactics from PS1, but I'm just not seeing how it's viable. Tanks in PS2 die super fast, even when shot in the front, let alone the rear.

I don't see how we're going to do anything other than: hug cover, creep forward, take potshots, reverse back behind cover.

Tanks take 6-7 shots from AV or other tanks, on their front armor right now, correct? Picture a battlefield of hundreds of troops. All it will take is 6-7 units to focus fire on you and you will die literally instantly.

[fvdham]

In PS1:
- a Lightning died after 3 shells of a Vanguard
- a Vanguard died after 20 shells of a Lightning

> Tanks take 6-7 shots from AV or other tanks, on their front armor right now,

So you are saying the MBT's in PS2 have twice the armor of a Lightning in PS1.
Sounds like balance for driver = gunner. :p

[SgtExo]

I don't see how a blitzkrieg could work. Here's what I see: you smash through the front line, and then your weak rear armor is now exposed to the line you just smashed through, assuming you didn't kill everything in that front line.

But let's say you did kill everything. Now what? You're at close range with enemies at the new the front line. You'll be slaughtered unless you retreat. But if you retreat... there's that exposed rear again.

That's why I'm saying that the PS1 tank driving, where you approach the front line, take shots on the move, and then circle back toward your own troops won't work. The moment you circle back, you're hosed, unless you can perfectly position yourself to always be near cover the moment you turn around.

People keep bringing up mobile tactics from PS1, but I'm just not seeing how it's viable. Tanks in PS2 die super fast, even when shot in the front, let alone the rear.

I don't see how we're going to do anything other than: hug cover, creep forward, take potshots, reverse back behind cover.

Tanks take 6-7 shots from AV or other tanks, on their front armor right now, correct? Picture a battlefield of hundreds of troops. All it will take is 6-7 units to focus fire on you and you will die literally instantly.

I don't think you understand what a blitzkrieg is by the look of it. A blitzkrieg is about concentrating your shock troops in a location and punching a hole in the enemies front lines. Then you have your fast moving units take advantage of that hole in the front line to rush in and aggressively push inside the enemies lines.

If you think of it, a MAX crash is a blitzkrieg when followed up by more mobile and versatile units. So if a base has a stable defense outside the base, you role in with your platoon of tanks, punch a whole clear for the infantry/sundies/galaxies to get all those infantry inside the base and capture it. And seeing how much more open the bases are and the fluidity of the combat, I do believe that blitzkrieg tactics will be very prevalent for organized outfits.

[SixShooter]

I don't see how we're going to do anything other than: hug cover, creep forward, take potshots, reverse back behind cover.

Tanks take 6-7 shots from AV or other tanks, on their front armor right now, correct? Picture a battlefield of hundreds of troops. All it will take is 6-7 units to focus fire on you and you will die literally instantly.

I don't see hiding as being a very reliable (or fun) tactic. What your talking about is making yourself a stationary target for oppsing MBTs, air to ground missles and infantry with c4. Regardless of locational damage, it's still harder to hit a moving target than it is to hit a stationary one and if you're beating a retreat you're still going to want to use the environment to your advantage.

There are more open areas that are perfect for large tank battles that were not shown in the E3 vids and tactics are going to be determined by the layout of the battlegrounds.

As far as low TTK for MBTs go, I really hope that tanks get a bit more solid and strudy through beta testing, just a bit:)

[Rivenshield]

I don't have the heart to tell my outfit they are useless, so we will just drive tanks.

How do your guys feel about a cert tree for a dedicated driver position?

How do they feel about the Prowler getting it for free, possibly?

[WorldOfForms]

I don't think you understand what a blitzkrieg is by the look of it. A blitzkrieg is about concentrating your shock troops in a location and punching a hole in the enemies front lines. Then you have your fast moving units take advantage of that hole in the front line to rush in and aggressively push inside the enemies lines.

If you think of it, a MAX crash is a blitzkrieg when followed up by more mobile and versatile units. So if a base has a stable defense outside the base, you role in with your platoon of tanks, punch a whole clear for the infantry/sundies/galaxies to get all those infantry inside the base and capture it. And seeing how much more open the bases are and the fluidity of the combat, I do believe that blitzkrieg tactics will be very prevalent for organized outfits.

That's basically what I was describing. So you punch through the line with your tanks, and then you have enemies behind you. They shoot your rear, you die.

With tanks being as vulnerable as they are, the enemy doesn't even have to shoot your rear. How are you going to punch through a line when enemy AV can kill you almost instantly?

Did you play PS1? A Vanguard took forty AV shots to kill, and even then in a heated battle they could die almost instantly because of so much lead flying through the air. Tanks that take 6-7 shots will be obliterated before they get anywhere near the line to punch through.

I don't think anyone is really considering what will happen when the armies are scaled up. Tanks are going to get hosed immediately out in the open unless the devs increase their armor dramatically.

[GhettoPrince]

Don't get me wrong, world of tanks is a great game, but those tactics are about 15 vs 15 matches, not a 300+ person fight where you have to take into account bombing runs, strafing from fighters, getting C4 dropped onto you by a jetpack trooper, anti tank mines ect. Realistically, a solo tank might as well be using a custom skin saying "FREE DOUBLE KILL".

I think the old wolf pack from Planetside 1 is probably still the best bet.

, I would love to see tank armor have a chance to deflect shots from an angle or have a chance to bounce from the front, but I doubt they have time to work on a feature like that.

[Rivenshield]

Did you play PS1? A Vanguard took forty AV shots to kill

*wat*

[SgtExo]

That's basically what I was describing. So you punch through the line with your tanks, and then you have enemies behind you. They shoot your rear, you die.

With tanks being as vulnerable as they are, the enemy doesn't even have to shoot your rear. How are you going to punch through a line when enemy AV can kill you almost instantly?

Did you play PS1? A Vanguard took forty AV shots to kill, and even then in a heated battle they could die almost instantly because of so much lead flying through the air. Tanks that take 6-7 shots will be obliterated before they get anywhere near the line to punch through.

I don't think anyone is really considering what will happen when the armies are scaled up. Tanks are going to get hosed immediately out in the open unless the devs increase their armor dramatically.

I have never played PS1, but the outfit that would move in an opening while leaving its rear exposed like that deserve to die.

What I was saying is not for the whole force to move in, that would leave the flanks and rear exposed like you stated, but only the strike force would move in leaving at least the other half of the force to hold the line and protect the strike forces vulnerable flanks. The purpose of a Blitzkrieg is to leave the enemy forces lost and confused with overwhelming forces first striking the weak points in the line first, then securing (meaning not leaving yourself vulnerable) the objectives.

That would be the way a highly skilled and practiced outfit would do it. It would start with infantry making contact, then they would report where the best place to break thru would be. Then the tanks, libs would start shelling the target, followed by ES planes taking out specific targets that holding the line. This would be followed when the line breaks by the Lightnings and ATVs that push into the enemy lines and covering the sunderers that are bringing in all the infantry that will take the base. You still need infantry and tanks to stay outside and keep the base clear of enemy tanks and air cover to protect the platoon that is securing the objective.

I personally cant wait to see tactics like this happen.

[Figment]

I don't see how a blitzkrieg could work. Here's what I see: you smash through the front line, and then your weak rear armor is now exposed to the line you just smashed through, assuming you didn't kill everything in that front line.

So it never worked for the Germans? ;) The point of Blitzkrieg is that your arse is protected by the infantry and other units pushing through behind you, plus the whole point of turning your enemy around is to make them easy targets and fire at THEIR rears. :)

But let's say you did kill everything. Now what? You're at close range with enemies at the new the front line. You'll be slaughtered unless you retreat. But if you retreat... there's that exposed rear again.

That might just be your goal: move the frontline. Think you should take a close look at Blitzkrieg tactics though. It's specifically designed for tanks.

That's why I'm saying that the PS1 tank driving, where you approach the front line, take shots on the move, and then circle back toward your own troops won't work. The moment you circle back, you're hosed, unless you can perfectly position yourself to always be near cover the moment you turn around.

People keep bringing up mobile tactics from PS1, but I'm just not seeing how it's viable. Tanks in PS2 die super fast, even when shot in the front, let alone the rear.

I don't see how we're going to do anything other than: hug cover, creep forward, take potshots, reverse back behind cover.

By playing very aggressive, you won't be showing your rear. But your allies must help in the push. Otherwise you're doomed.

Tanks take 6-7 shots from AV or other tanks, on their front armor right now, correct? Picture a battlefield of hundreds of troops. All it will take is 6-7 units to focus fire on you and you will die literally instantly.

Which means you have to move in groups and sprint from cover to cover. Safety in the herd is a very old nature tactic.

[vVRedOctoberVv]

Boils down to careful placement, and as you suggested, in the real world, tanks tend to choose their positions carefully and fire from hull-down. It all depends on circumstances, but basically, you're always ahead to have some kind of plan and situational awareness rather than just charging blindly at your target.

And team work. Lots of team work. Lone wolves die fast.

[SgtMAD]

maybe three posts in thread that even begin to understand the problem of tank fight in PS2

going in reverse isn't going to work out because you won't be able to see what is behind you,most tanks are going to be running around with only a driver/gunner solo so a second set of eyes like in PS1 aren't going to be around.
if you want to get a good idea of how that is going to work, go grab a lightning in PS1 and attack other tanks.

you can grab a second gunner for AA but from what i read here on PSU,everyone says they are going to just grab another tank instead of that,

using lightnings in PS2 for an AA platform is comical,the idea of all these lightning drivers trying to track air targets above them with the crosshairs while trying to move around to avoid the other aircraft going after him is going to lead to huge piles of dead armor.

the reason the SkyGuard works is the driver,he keeps that buggy moving around as fast as it can go while the gunner fires at the aircraft,if you make that gunner drive then that veh is a deathtrap

a combined column will get shredded by by an air group,all the air has to do is target the AA first and the rest of the tanks are rolling XP for the surviving air to clean up.

you are going to see so much aircraft that armor is going to have a tough time surviving long enough to be effective,can you imagine a tank column getting jumped in one of those tight canyons and running into each other trying to fight and run,then the libs fly over and start using that 150mm to kill armor.

you cannot compare the tanks in PS1 to the armor we are going to see(as of today,LOL)in PS2.the only thing they have in common is the names of their predecessors(sp)in the original

[Landtank]

maybe three posts in thread that even begin to understand the problem of tank fight in PS2

going in reverse isn't going to work out because you won't be able to see what is behind you,most tanks are going to be running around with only a driver/gunner solo so a second set of eyes like in PS1 aren't going to be around.
if you want to get a good idea of how that is going to work, go grab a lightning in PS1 and attack other tanks.

you can grab a second gunner for AA but from what i read here on PSU,everyone says they are going to just grab another tank instead of that,

using lightnings in PS2 for an AA platform is comical,the idea of all these lightning drivers trying to track air targets above them with the crosshairs while trying to move around to avoid the other aircraft going after him is going to lead to huge piles of dead armor.

the reason the SkyGuard works is the driver,he keeps that buggy moving around as fast as it can go while the gunner fires at the aircraft,if you make that gunner drive then that veh is a deathtrap

a combined column will get shredded by by an air group,all the air has to do is target the AA first and the rest of the tanks are rolling XP for the surviving air to clean up.

you are going to see so much aircraft that armor is going to have a tough time surviving long enough to be effective,can you imagine a tank column getting jumped in one of those tight canyons and running into each other trying to fight and run,then the libs fly over and start using that 150mm to kill armor.

you cannot compare the tanks in PS1 to the armor we are going to see(as of today,LOL)in PS2.the only thing they have in common is the names of their predecessors(sp)in the original

If you see a lot of Air Cav, then you will see even more Anti Air.

I'm sure you will be able to right click and look around without moving the turret, that only makes sense to me.

If we can't look backwards while reversing with our turret facing forwards, well then it encourages situational awareness! Real tank crews do it somehow, I'm sure we could figure it out in a video game.

[Figment]

stuffs

I would imagine most single crew tank collums would be half AA Lightnings, half MBTs with AA secondary.

It's going to be harder to kill tanks with aircav than in PS1, aside from the Lib which currently seems to only need to breathe in the direction of a tank to kill it.

[StumpyTheOzzie]

This whole Blitzkreig thing is all very well and good from a theoretical standpoint but if your goal is to take a tower or something, wouldn't you just grab a lot of infantry and stick them in a couple of gals?

Infantry are required to take the objective. Tanks can't fit inside very easily.

If you have WW2 style front lines of thousands of troopers in trenches then I think a column of armour will punch a nice neat hole through that and will be able to (with a few losses) drive along to whatever the objective is.

If the objective is slaughter, I think Air > Tanks. They have similar firepower moving at faster speeds (covering larger arcs of fire) are not troubled by terrain obstacles and "bang for buck" seem very cheap.

So maybe tanks ARE useless after all?:doh:

[WorldOfForms]

So it never worked for the Germans? ;) The point of Blitzkrieg is that your arse is protected by the infantry and other units pushing through behind you, plus the whole point of turning your enemy around is to make them easy targets and fire at THEIR rears. :)



That might just be your goal: move the frontline. Think you should take a close look at Blitzkrieg tactics though. It's specifically designed for tanks.



By playing very aggressive, you won't be showing your rear. But your allies must help in the push. Otherwise you're doomed.



Which means you have to move in groups and sprint from cover to cover. Safety in the herd is a very old nature tactic.

The part I'm not seeing is how some units following behind you is going to protect you from getting shot in the rear. Units aren't some giant wall that blocks shots to your rear. A Lancer can easily pinpoint a tank's rear unless the ENTIRE rear is behind cover.

And how are tanks supposed to sprint from cover to cover in the larger open spaces that are supposed to be "designed for tank battles"?

I still don't see an answer to this problem: you advance in your tank with your front facing the enemy. You start taking AV fire. You have maybe 2-3 seconds before you explode. What do you do? Unless cover is RIGHT next to you, you have to retreat and evade, exposing your rear. And you're not evading anything with lock-on AV trained on you.

How do you plan to survive if you're not next to cover ALL THE TIME? How do you deal with infantry on base walls? In PS1 the only thing a tank could do when AV infantry fired upon them from an elevated position was to retreat. How are you going to retreat when that exposes your rear?

Everyone keeps saying groups and teamwork will somehow solve this problem, but when it boils down to it, each tank driver will have to deal with the scenarios I'm describing regardless of how many people are coordinating with them. So what if 20 friendly tanks are near you? What happens when a handful of AV infantry start shooting you from a walltop?

[Tatwi]

To give you an idea...

The other weekend in PS1 I was out in the field in a Lightning, firing at BFR who was up on a ridge while I strafed through the valley below. I was hitting him with every shot, but he was busy shooting at someone else, until I guess I got too pesky and he laid into me. I quickly determined that the only way I could retreat was to charge him and then bolt left down the edge of the valley wall below him. Why? Because the angle was too steep for him to fire down at me! It worked. I was able to get out his line of fire, retreat around the corner, repair, and get back on the field with the rest of our armor. We chased those BFRs for quite a while, taking out one or two of them with the use of baiting and flanking. I finally bit the dust when I went to flank one of them and ended up parked beside yet another one of their BFRs...oops lol...

Tactics for vehicles are just as deep as tactics for anything else.

[SixShooter]

The part I'm not seeing is how some units following behind you is going to protect you from getting shot in the rear. Units aren't some giant wall that blocks shots to your rear. A Lancer can easily pinpoint a tank's rear unless the ENTIRE rear is behind cover.

And how are tanks supposed to sprint from cover to cover in the larger open spaces that are supposed to be "designed for tank battles"?

I still don't see an answer to this problem: you advance in your tank with your front facing the enemy. You start taking AV fire. You have maybe 2-3 seconds before you explode. What do you do? Unless cover is RIGHT next to you, you have to retreat and evade, exposing your rear. And you're not evading anything with lock-on AV trained on you.

How do you plan to survive if you're not next to cover ALL THE TIME? How do you deal with infantry on base walls? In PS1 the only thing a tank could do when AV infantry fired upon them from an elevated position was to retreat. How are you going to retreat when that exposes your rear?

Everyone keeps saying groups and teamwork will somehow solve this problem, but when it boils down to it, each tank driver will have to deal with the scenarios I'm describing regardless of how many people are coordinating with them. So what if 20 friendly tanks are near you? What happens when a handful of AV infantry start shooting you from a walltop?

Basically this thread is starting to boil down to this:
OMG!!! TANKS WILL DIE NO MATTER WHAT YOU DO AND THERE IS NO TACTIC TO KEEP YOU FROM GETTING KILLED WHEN YOU WANT TO RUN AWAY FROM A FIGHT!!!!!!!!!
Realistically, there is no way to protect your weak spots 100%. You are going to have to expose your ass from time to time in a tank battle - deal with it. Of course you're going to die but with good teamwork you should die a lot less.

Holy shit! What if a bunch of AV guys start shooting from rooftops??? -- Shoot back dude, that's what the guns are for;)

[Unforgiven]

as a tanker in the Corps, i say this...

nobody in this game will even have the slightest clue how to use tanks, perform manuvers to close with the enemy in a tank, or be able to effectively use any tank skills outside of videogames to locate and destroy your enemy by fire with a "effective tank unit"

having said that, i cant wait to see what people come up with in the game, what works, and what doesn't work. im sure REAL tank tactics wont do squat in the game, because in RL we dont have afghani soldiers with jump packs, or a tank that hovers.

not to mention the reload times are just... awful. if it takes your crew more than 5 seconds between rounds, your dead. end of story.

[WorldOfForms]

*wat*

Lancer damage: 125 per shot

Vanguard Armor: 4500

Shots to kill: 36

So I exaggerated by a whopping 4 shots.

And this is the absolute BEST DPS AV had, as the Striker had slightly less DPS and the Phoenix was waaaaaaay behind this.

[Zar]

The rear isn't any more vulnerable then the front. The only real difference is you can't return fire, and if retreat is being considered, returning fire isn't really going to do you any good anyway. Better to focus on maneuvering and forcing your opponent to constantly adjust his aim on the fly while driving through obstacle fields.

With the way PS2 is doing things, the most common tactics for tanks will be stationary artillery points, few shots will be done on the move and that is killing one of the biggest advantages (and the core reason behind the invention) of tanks. Mobile warfare isn't going to be very mobile, unless you are good at what you do.

This means that tanks will be more vulnerable to infantry, which is what they attempted to do with BFRs. The DEVs are aiming for a full circle of rock-paper-scissors but it will inevitably be a triangle with Air Cav being on top (which, coincidentally, is exactly like RL and exactly the way things should be anyway).

As for in-game tactics, you can plot and plan but until we get in the game, there's no real point.
as of right now >.< tanks take more dmg from the rear =x this in beta builds as of now soooo >.>.

[SgtExo]

The part I'm not seeing is how some units following behind you is going to protect you from getting shot in the rear. Units aren't some giant wall that blocks shots to your rear. A Lancer can easily pinpoint a tank's rear unless the ENTIRE rear is behind cover.

And how are tanks supposed to sprint from cover to cover in the larger open spaces that are supposed to be "designed for tank battles"?

I still don't see an answer to this problem: you advance in your tank with your front facing the enemy. You start taking AV fire. You have maybe 2-3 seconds before you explode. What do you do? Unless cover is RIGHT next to you, you have to retreat and evade, exposing your rear. And you're not evading anything with lock-on AV trained on you.

How do you plan to survive if you're not next to cover ALL THE TIME? How do you deal with infantry on base walls? In PS1 the only thing a tank could do when AV infantry fired upon them from an elevated position was to retreat. How are you going to retreat when that exposes your rear?

Everyone keeps saying groups and teamwork will somehow solve this problem, but when it boils down to it, each tank driver will have to deal with the scenarios I'm describing regardless of how many people are coordinating with them. So what if 20 friendly tanks are near you? What happens when a handful of AV infantry start shooting you from a walltop?

1) It doesn't really matter if 1 or 2 hits come when you are pushing in, that is expected, that is why you have enough forces to deal with loses. Also the infantry that is guarding your rear should be able to deal with any AV that exposes himself enough to get any good shots in.

2) Open areas are good for tanks because they can use their range and speed to their advantage, so they are not supposed to sprint from cover to cover. In an open plain infantry wont have anywhere to hide, planes will be seen from far away and can be dealt with if equipped appropriately. What tanks can use for cover in open areas the rolling hills and dried river beds that lets tanks sneak up and flank enemy positions. So what seems like an empty plain to someone, could easily be teaming with opposing armor.

3) The reason you wont die instantly is that a good blitzkrieg attacks the weak portion of the line with overwhelming forces. This means that while you might get hit a couple of times, it is the other side that should be vaporized off the face of the planet. So you don't attack the place where there is 20 AV weapons just waiting for you. You maneuver around that position and attack its weak flank or from a direction that is not anticipated.

4) Infantry on walls are not that dangerous, unless you get within their area of influence. Because they are in a fixed position, they can be easily outmaneuvered (which is at the core of a good blitzkrieg). If you have to take that position, you can start by suppressing them with long range weapons (tank fire, snipers), then move in infantry closer by moving under cover (using topography, smoke, distractions), then they can assault the wall, or just keep them pinned down while the rest of the team takes the objectives.

If that's not clear enough for you, then I don't know what will satisfy you!

[WorldOfForms]

Basically this thread is starting to boil down to this:
OMG!!! TANKS WILL DIE NO MATTER WHAT YOU DO AND THERE IS NO TACTIC TO KEEP YOU FROM GETTING KILLED WHEN YOU WANT TO RUN AWAY FROM A FIGHT!!!!!!!!!
Realistically, there is no way to protect your weak spots 100%. You are going to have to expose your ass from time to time in a tank battle - deal with it. Of course you're going to die but with good teamwork you should die a lot less.

Holy shit! What if a bunch of AV guys start shooting from rooftops??? -- Shoot back dude, that's what the guns are for;)

I considered stating the obvious in a previous post, but decided it wasn't necessary. Alas, it is.

Infantry on elevated positions are essentially immune to tank fire. Splash damage can't hit them, so your only hope is to get a lucky shot on a dumb infantry that pokes his head out for too long. It's whack a mole.

I've driven every tank in PS1 extensively. Even with a survivability of taking 36 shots from AV, a vanguard would evaporate if you strayed too close to enemy troops.

Do we not see the problem, then, if tanks die in 6-7 shots? And even fewer if hit from the rear?

Tanks have become less survivable, but infantry haven't (instagib in both scenarios). Yet everyone thinks tanks will be able to use similar tactics to PS1.

I'm not trying to say "Tanks will blow up no matter what you do OMG!" I'm saying, what CAN we do to not blow up instantly? Other than creeping out from cover, there must be something, but the tactics I've heard mentioned so far don't sound remotely realistic and seem to completely ignore how paper thin tanks are now.

[Kashis]

I Hate the new tanks. They need separate tank gunner and separate tank driver. You want a coax on it? Get another gunner for it... He's called the TC or Tank Commander.

We have an exponential number of people on these servers. Why not bunch them up? It's more realistic anyways. I'm done.

[SgtExo]

I considered stating the obvious in a previous post, but decided it wasn't necessary. Alas, it is.

Infantry on elevated positions are essentially immune to tank fire. Splash damage can't hit them, so your only hope is to get a lucky shot on a dumb infantry that pokes his head out for too long. It's whack a mole.

I've driven every tank in PS1 extensively. Even with a survivability of taking 36 shots from AV, a vanguard would evaporate if you strayed too close to enemy troops.

Do we not see the problem, then, if tanks die in 6-7 shots? And even fewer if hit from the rear?

Tanks have become less survivable, but infantry haven't (instagib in both scenarios). Yet everyone thinks tanks will be able to use similar tactics to PS1.

I'm not trying to say "Tanks will blow up no matter what you do OMG!" I'm saying, what CAN we do to not blow up instantly? Other than creeping out from cover, there must be something, but the tactics I've heard mentioned so far don't sound remotely realistic and seem to completely ignore how paper thin tanks are now.

But if you attack an entrenched and elevated infantry position that is exactly what should happen because those are awful tactical maneuver for tanks. An enemy that is entrenched cannot move unless it comes out of its position. You have your strengths against the enemies weaknesses, which would be its inability to maneuver without exposing itself. If an enemy is solidly entrenched, go around it and attack an exposed base. If the enemy does not react, you can roam at will inside enemy territory. If they decide to attack you, you just have forced them to meet them on your terms instead of theirs, which means you have the advantage.

[WorldOfForms]

But if you attack an entrenched and elevated infantry position that is exactly what should happen because those are awful tactical maneuver for tanks. An enemy that is entrenched cannot move unless it comes out of its position. You have your strengths against the enemies weaknesses, which would be its inability to maneuver without exposing itself. If an enemy is solidly entrenched, go around it and attack an exposed base. If the enemy does not react, you can roam at will inside enemy territory. If they decide to attack you, you just have forced them to meet them on your terms instead of theirs, which means you have the advantage.

Attacking a position with infantry in elevated, protected positions is unavoidable in this game. Territory is controlled by bases, outposts and towers. That's where ALL the important conflicts will take place.

I'm not complaining - I like that infantry will have a better chance against tanks this time around. Tanks are just insanely paper thin currently, and I'm trying to figure out how they will survive if nothing changes (even though I'm almost certain their armor will be buffed dramatically).

[Landtank]

Man thank god for beta, or you know, these problems wouldn't get fixed.

[SgtExo]

Attacking a position with infantry in elevated, protected positions is unavoidable in this game. Territory is controlled by bases, outposts and towers. That's where ALL the important conflicts will take place.

I would agree with you if there was just one, but there are many. So you can choose where to attack, and attacking uphill an entrenched position is just idiotic and will result in many a deaths.

[AvacadoEight]

I bet SOME Of the Crack Pot tactics would work.

If the NC are charging and the TR are spread kind of thin, but the NC keep a tight, cohesive battle group, they could probably just pick them off.

Plus, who the hell WOULDN'T want to see a massive tank column charging a base?

[Figment]

The part I'm not seeing is how some units following behind you is going to protect you from getting shot in the rear. Units aren't some giant wall that blocks shots to your rear. A Lancer can easily pinpoint a tank's rear unless the ENTIRE rear is behind cover.

And how are tanks supposed to sprint from cover to cover in the larger open spaces that are supposed to be "designed for tank battles"?

There's no significant cover in the flats aside from the small ridges that Hamma went through with the ATV indeed. It is however more suited to Prowler combat than the Vanguard or Magrider. Desolation never had much cover, but it was excellent for Lightning and ATV combat, just because you could drive along the edge of hills. Infantry have no cover there either.

I still don't see an answer to this problem: you advance in your tank with your front facing the enemy. You start taking AV fire. You have maybe 2-3 seconds before you explode. What do you do? Unless cover is RIGHT next to you, you have to retreat and evade, exposing your rear. And you're not evading anything with lock-on AV trained on you.

How do you plan to survive if you're not next to cover ALL THE TIME? How do you deal with infantry on base walls? In PS1 the only thing a tank could do when AV infantry fired upon them from an elevated position was to retreat. How are you going to retreat when that exposes your rear?

Everyone keeps saying groups and teamwork will somehow solve this problem, but when it boils down to it, each tank driver will have to deal with the scenarios I'm describing regardless of how many people are coordinating with them. So what if 20 friendly tanks are near you? What happens when a handful of AV infantry start shooting you from a walltop?

Like in PS1, if a handful of infantry fires at you from a walltop, you might die. I agree that the tanks aren't as powerful as they should be given the context, particularly the MBTs seem extremely weak both with and without gunner (moreso with given the endurance per player is halfed, tbh).

If you are with a large group of units, they will need more time though and can't concentrate fire as easily, meaning you have to storm past them to reach their dead angles and have them expose themselves in a different manner, hopefully to the infantry that's sniping or advancing behind you (they won't immediately be able to hit you). Especially if, like with Blitzkrieg, instead of spreading out over a wide area, you concentrate your units on weak points of the enemy. You don't go blindly storming in. You can also bring a couple Sunderers as frontal armour and with infantry to take the high ground as you storm past. If you make sure the high ground AV is preoccupied, they can't fire even if they would have had the opportunity. Sometimes the goal of heavy armour might simply be distraction in that respect: AV high ground turns around, Sundy pulls up behind them with agiles... ehr jet packers and they take the position. After that the enemy should become less organized as they spawn one by one and don't quite know where you are. Of course, you shouldn't stick around in the same place too long.

And the nice thing about a large group of units is that someone will hit a hard to hit target. A group of Thunderers is deadly to a couple Reavers, despite mostly every shot missing. Sheer volume of fire and luck means someone will hit.

Lastly, tanks are meant to advance the frontline, not so much to hold the frontline. Retreating doesn't always have to be part of the plan.

[Ivam Akorahil]

This is not a debate about driver/gunner, etc. This is about trying to imagine how we will drive tanks, considering what we know about them.

The part that has me most confused is how we are going to retreat from combat, as the rear of the tank is the vulnerable part. If I engage a large number of enemies on a relatively stable frontline of combat, what happens when I need to retreat? Won't turning to escape get me killed by exposing my backside? This is assuming I'm not in a magrider.

It seems like the best tactic in a large fight will be to attempt hull-down placement or just peeking out from behind obstacles and then backing up almost as soon as you take fire. The old methods of weaving around and driving off over hills probably won't work anymore.


We'll have to play to see if this is a good or bad thing. Am I missing anything? How do you think tanks will have to position and maneuver considering the low TTK and the vulnerable rear?

ive been a tank driver and gunner in the army for 4 years and i found that in games like bf3 and that way also ps2, it actualy works to apply the real life battletank tactics.

so yes you approach carefuly, you stay off hilltops, you "flow" like the water through valleys and ditches and you attack through "narrow" lanes of fire that shield you well, provide cover and possibly let you flank the enemy while the rest of your outfit tries to fix the enemy in position or even lure them out.

hull down is allways a must, retreat or shifting allways in V movements, never show your rear to the enemy, never move completly sideways , make sure flanks are covered, preferably by infantry, and allways have anti air guns on your tank

if you have 4 properly educated tank drivers , utilizing these guidelines you can tip balances of battle.

important is allways : tanks dont go in close quarter spaces without proper infantry support. The battletank is a long range weapon, practise long range fire, be good at it, an enemy tanks should be destroyed before its 200m close to you (thats allready adapted to ingame , in real life youd try to aim for 2 kilometers)

make sure to utilize canopies form trees as air cover, if you dont get spotted you dont get shot at.

P.S. the most important thing ever : FIRE AND MOVEMENT!

[ParisTeta]

@Ivam How would you imagine tank tactics with a magrider (no turret,low fixed forward gun), but strafe cability (but slower then forward speed)?

[fvdham]

Well ,if all tanks are light tanks
the primary role of tanks will be to boost the morale of the infantry
by driving among them, looking impressive and making engine noises.