Shouldn't be able to kill the gunner of the tank destroyers.

Noodlesocks
3135 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
I get the reason behind it but kind of makes them useless if the gunner can just be shot out or killed by any stray explosive. I feel like this is one of those things where gameplay should take precedent over realism and have the gunner protected inside the vehicle ala BF1's AA/Artillery truck.

Comments

  • M_Rat13
    1368 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I agree. The stipulation for having to work as a team to operate one is disadvantage enough.
  • WinterWarhurst
    1319 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    I get the reason behind it but kind of makes them useless if the gunner can just be shot out or killed by any stray explosive. I feel like this is one of those things where gameplay should take precedent over realism and have the gunner protected inside the vehicle ala BF1's AA/Artillery truck.

    Ok so this vehicle is incredibly powerful and balanced as such. If you make the gunner invincible, then it should be rebalanced. You have a huge rate of damage, great range, and infinite ammo supply.

    Enemy tanks can only kill the gunner if they hit the shield, or within their blast radius of it.

    Either way, you can’t have it both ways, if you want extra protection you should relinquish firepower.
  • parkingbrake
    3202 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Well you shouldn't be able to snipe the gunner on a fixed AT gun either, they didn't work standing up like that, but there it is in the game.
  • Hawxxeye
    6314 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    the artillery truck was working just fine in BF1. I do not get why they decided to make the PAK gunners exposed to shots and explosive damage.
  • WinterWarhurst
    1319 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    I’m sorry dudes but it’s not like those Pak cannons have 1000m armour plates on them
  • Santini3
    46 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I’m sorry dudes but it’s not like those Pak cannons have 1000m armour plates on them

    Yea I'm confused as to why people believe pak 40 gunners SHOULDN'T be able to be shot or blown up..
  • WinterWarhurst
    1319 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Santini3 wrote: »
    I’m sorry dudes but it’s not like those Pak cannons have 1000m armour plates on them

    Yea I'm confused as to why people believe pak 40 gunners SHOULDN'T be able to be shot or blown up..

    I mean it’s balanced as such, it is more effective than any tank cannons, so for people to complain is simply farcical IMO. If you want an armour buff you’ll get a firepower nerf. They’ve already been buffed multiple times.

    In fact they are so powerful I memorise where they are on most maps and knock them out regardless of whether they are manned or not.
  • Dr_X2345
    774 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Santini3 wrote: »
    I’m sorry dudes but it’s not like those Pak cannons have 1000m armour plates on them

    Yea I'm confused as to why people believe pak 40 gunners SHOULDN'T be able to be shot or blown up..

    I mean it’s balanced as such, it is more effective than any tank cannons, so for people to complain is simply farcical IMO. If you want an armour buff you’ll get a firepower nerf. They’ve already been buffed multiple times.

    In fact they are so powerful I memorise where they are on most maps and knock them out regardless of whether they are manned or not.

    I like to just keep watch on them when sniping, and if someone starts firing it I'll just swing over, wait for the right moment and pop their head. Easy kills.
    But yeah, being able to shoot the gunner is fine IMO, although if shooting the front armour plate with a tank kills the gunner maybe that should be changed. But from other angles, fine. They're exposed, they should be able to be shot.
  • Noodlesocks
    3135 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I get the reason behind it but kind of makes them useless if the gunner can just be shot out or killed by any stray explosive. I feel like this is one of those things where gameplay should take precedent over realism and have the gunner protected inside the vehicle ala BF1's AA/Artillery truck.

    Ok so this vehicle is incredibly powerful and balanced as such. If you make the gunner invincible, then it should be rebalanced. You have a huge rate of damage, great range, and infinite ammo supply.

    Enemy tanks can only kill the gunner if they hit the shield, or within their blast radius of it.

    Either way, you can’t have it both ways, if you want extra protection you should relinquish firepower.

    If it were a regular respawnable vehicle then I'd agree but it's a squad call-in. It costs the squad to deploy it and can be rendered ineffective without even having to destroy the vehicle itself. A grenade, a single bomb, a guy with even a little elevation; heck, even a guy from the side with a pistol can shut the things down.
     
    Sturmtiger/Crocodile is only about 10,000 more and is so much more effective for its cost.
  • SendTheInfantry
    788 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I agree, its pretty stupid
  • WinterWarhurst
    1319 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    I get the reason behind it but kind of makes them useless if the gunner can just be shot out or killed by any stray explosive. I feel like this is one of those things where gameplay should take precedent over realism and have the gunner protected inside the vehicle ala BF1's AA/Artillery truck.

    Ok so this vehicle is incredibly powerful and balanced as such. If you make the gunner invincible, then it should be rebalanced. You have a huge rate of damage, great range, and infinite ammo supply.

    Enemy tanks can only kill the gunner if they hit the shield, or within their blast radius of it.

    Either way, you can’t have it both ways, if you want extra protection you should relinquish firepower.

    If it were a regular respawnable vehicle then I'd agree but it's a squad call-in. It costs the squad to deploy it and can be rendered ineffective without even having to destroy the vehicle itself. A grenade, a single bomb, a guy with even a little elevation; heck, even a guy from the side with a pistol can shut the things down.
     
    Sturmtiger/Crocodile is only about 10,000 more and is so much more effective for its cost.

    If you don’t want to get sniped sit in the front gunner seat, I have friends that have done 50+ streaks in this position... or use elevated terrain, etc. But come on guys it’s super effective against tanks what more do you want?
  • parkingbrake
    3202 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Santini3 wrote: »
    I’m sorry dudes but it’s not like those Pak cannons have 1000m armour plates on them

    Yea I'm confused as to why people believe pak 40 gunners SHOULDN'T be able to be shot or blown up..

    If a sniper has an elevated position then he should be able to hit the gunner on a fixed AT gun despite that gunner being behind an armored shield because the sniper can see over the shield. But if the sniper doesn't have an elevated position, well DICE took care of that by making the gunner work standing rather than crouching so he's exposed. Doesn't make any sense of course, the shield was there so the crew could be protected by it and the telescopic sight is behind that shield, but this is one of those bits of fiction DICE tosses in for "balance". On the other hand some bits of fiction are fine and shouldn't be messed with--try telling a tanker that he shouldn't have that magic floating camera above his vehicle that gives him a great view of everything (including opponents behind cover at times) and see how he reacts.

    Obviously a tank's main gun is another story, it kills the AT gunner and destroys the gun too and that makes sense. It's the artificial vulnerability to snipers that amuses me.
Sign In or Register to comment.