Anyone here enjoy being gunner in tank?

[Ghiblian]

I am sure every projectile apart from the gunship missiles can penetrate the air-vehicles active-protection thing.

Eh... read my post. o.O That would be an absolutely ridiculously useless shield if all it blocked were gunship missiles.

[Takon]

the purpose of the gunner is to kill recon when they rush you with RDX.

[Micster]

Eh... it's nearly impossible to kill infantry if you're in the Nekomata. With the Tiger, it's a lot easier, but it's also a lot easier for the main tank to kill infantry. And the tank gunner's purpose is anti-air. It's just not very effective at it.

I don't find any difficulty in killing Infantry with either tanks on the Second position.

I do not truly agree with the tank gunner's purpose as anti-air. It can't look directly up and it does a very small amount of damage. I do try and damage Air units this way, but not often do I get a kill.

[firescout555]

IMO a gunner help makes capping flags easier, since they help cover the shortfall and weakness of a tank. i often park my tank on a piece of cover with the rear facing the cover(on neko), while the tiger i have to turn my turret towards the rear to check my rear if there is no cover, all while looking for other threats. with a gunner, hopefully they can help me do the job.(that is, hopefully...)

on topic, even if there is nothing to do in gunner seat, you can earn their assist points lol...

[Ghiblian]

I don't find any difficulty in killing Infantry with either tanks on the Second position.

I do not truly agree with the tank gunner's purpose as anti-air. It can't look directly up and it does a very small amount of damage. I do try and damage Air units this way, but not often do I get a kill.

If you read what I said, I basically stated that its intended purpose is to kill air. Again, it's just not very good at it. I guess you're a very good shot with that gun because with a Nekomata strafing all over the place, I can barely land a single good shot on infantry.

[Micster]

If you read what I said, I basically stated that its intended purpose is to kill air. Again, it's just not very good at it. I guess you're a very good shot with that gun because with a Nekomata strafing all over the place, I can barely land a single good shot on infantry.

I suppose that it's just preference then, everybody's good at different things.

[HTE1]

If you read what I said, I basically stated that its intended purpose is to kill air.

Correct, it's enough to scare off a hovering gunship and if you're lucky, very lucky finish it off as he heads for home. But when does a good gunship (i.e. one worth worrying about) ever hover above a Tank?

Edit. The beta tank gunner had a lot more bang per pound

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=srMhMhGSfE4

[dontsh000t]

the tank gun has no splash damage which means you'll have to aim accurately from a moving platform, and it has a slower ROF than the FAV i tink.
the gunner should get guns that are half as powerful as the transport ones in terms of splash.

[Deesies]

They should add vehicle capping back for tanks. Seems silly that the gunner has to get out to cap the silo/flag.

It's understandable for APCs and transports but kinda annoying for tanks :P

[The_Eliminator]

I think they should just increase the damage and its splash but limit it to actually having ammo like the walker does.

[AllFoamNoBeer]

Eh... read my post. o.O That would be an absolutely ridiculously useless shield if all it blocked were gunship missiles.

Actually, I have tried this, and the tanks secondary and primary fire did damage a gunship.

Maybe it protects a gunship from other AA weapons (SAAW, AA turret etc), but not other classes of weapons (tank shell etc).

[Minmaster]

splash damage from tank gunners should be increased when the tank is moving. it's almost impossible to shoot down infantry when the tank is moving at full speed, therefore a little splash damage should help out. same with FAVs...it's also impossible to shoot down anybody while it's moving. give them splash damage like the aircraft guns.

[Thy-Tormentor]

the purpose of the gunner is to kill recon when they rush you with RDX.

The sad thing is, that you'll never have a chance to hit that bunnyhopping SOB with the already bouncing tank, like Nekomata. On top of that, the muzzle flash will make it hard to even see your target at all. I honestly think the gunner position has been rendered useless due to the sum of many flaws. First of all, the damage dealt is insignficiant, in practice. In combination of circumstances mentioned above, will cause serious trouble for the gunner.

Secondly, the view from the gunner's position is very poor. Especially on larger maps, it takes a rare mentality for one, to willingly become a tank gunner. All he can actually do, is to spot targets mainly around, or above the tank itself, and distract enemy air units, in which, the machine gun is practically useless. While it does cause hoverers to flee, it won't cause enough damage or confusion for the gunship, to cancel it's attack run.

On the other hand, in Belgrade, or around more complex environments like flag zones, gunner's importance grows exponentionally higher. As mentioned, he cna provide invaluable cover for the tank against recon troops/engineers, trying to approach from the flanks, or behind. When the settings becomes more offensive for the tank, there is again little, that the gunner can do. Infantry is able to conceal themselves much better in urban environments, thus, leaves even less time for the gunner to react to any possible threats. In my opinion this is unfair, because if you compare the engineers ability to fire it's pilum at the tank, against the gunner's ability to respond, there is a significant difference, imbalanced towards the pilum. The problem is at it's worst with Nekomata, because of it's unstable frame, in practive the gunner is left almost wiothout any chances to fight back. Being disadvantaged at close distances, this naturally forces the tank to keep the distance, again, almost entirely disabling the gunner.

The gun imperatively needs a buff to it's damage, and A) A higher rate of fire B) Zoom, comparable with the tank's main cannon, as mentioned before.

[Trippet]

Eh... read my post. o.O That would be an absolutely ridiculously useless shield if all it blocked were gunship missiles.

Actually, I have tried this, and the tanks secondary and primary fire did damage a gunship.

Maybe it protects a gunship from other AA weapons (SAAW, AA turret etc), but not other classes of weapons (tank shell etc).

Time for DICE to shed some light. Demize99? CKMC? LexLuther?

[Deesies]

yes, shields only protect against missiles and large projectiles (tank shells)

MG and AA fire will still get through.