Dunk Mujunk
RestlessSpirits
D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E
115
   |
Posted - 2013.09.22 20:41:00 -
[1] - Quote
I know this is a crazy theory that no one ever wants to accept, but if tanks and infantry would WORK TOGETHER AS 1 ELEMENT things would be much better for everyone, tanks especially. You don't want anyone in your tank, I know. I've heard that **** 76 trillion times now. Fine. Not sure why you have extra turrets in your tanks, but whatever. How about we all start WORKING TOGETHER, you know, the way it's suppose to be? Infantry units are suppose to support armor units because in any setting other than a gigantic wide open field the best way to kill a tank is infantry.
Look at Americas most recent incursion into Iraq. Yeah, the US wiped the actual Iraqi army off the map almost immediately. Then what happened? We started sending our forces into the cities where, even with substantial infantry support, our tanks were getting knocked out by at times single RPGs. How much does an M-1 Abrams Main Battle Tank cost? How much training is required to operate it? And how much does an RPG cost? How much training is required to operate it? In any situation other than wide open large number tank vs tank battles the most efficient and lowest risk way to eliminate a tank is with infantry.
So why even bring a tank you ask? Lets say you have squad A vs squad B. For the sake of the argument lets assume tankers and infantry cooperate, work together, and protect each other. Squad A brings a tank. Squad B doesn't. Squad A wins engagement, plain and simple. Squad B would have to bring in a tank to compete. If squad Bs tank just rushed straight in (pushing 3 foot soldiers on his bumper the whole way) without trying to work with his/her infantry support, he/she would be killed and squad A would take the battle.
And this is my problem with calls for tank buffs. I'm not saying no to tank buffs, i'm saying you cannot buff tanks according to how they operate as a lone unit. You have to buff tanks according to how they operate as a part of a team. If I see a tanker in a match running over his foot soldiers (when there is no threat to the tank), not hanging out to support pushes or support the complete neutralization of objectives, blowing up supply depots needlessly (some depots do need to go down, but not all of them), and not letting his/her infantry support them, then I see the same tanker QQing on the forums and calling for buffs, i'm gonna say kiss my lilly white @ss.
What happens on these same forums when an infantry player QQs about losing his/her proto stuff in a solo pub match? The community rips him/her a new butthole, collects the tears, has a good laugh, and moves on. Would you take me seriously if I said Assault players need a buff because we are easily killed when we are on our own with no support? No, you wouldn't, and that's why I pay little to no mind to 99% of what most tankers say.
I feel for tankers, I really do. Your chosen profession is an expensive one, and the main reason most tankers have such sh!tty attitudes on the forums is due to mistreatment by infantry players. It sucks, I know. But it is what it is, you just gotta role with the punches. I know you can't control blue dots, but you either have to learn to deal with them, or only run in squads (where blue dots can still be a problem, I know). Because door locks, while a great idea and something that needs to be implemented, are not the solution to your problems Tankers. Sure, they are a solution to A problem, but no matter what they do to tanks, a lone tanker will ALWAYS be bested by a Tanker working with his/her infantry. And a lone tanker will ALMOST NEVER have the upper hand when engaging infantry with any amount of AV. |