Some AP-Canguard footage.

Then by all means, show me even one example where there were tons and tons of tanks working directly with infantry. Because I'm actually a rather large history buff and the only times I ever saw records of massive tank zergs like we see in PS2, infantry weren't around because infantry being with them would have actively hindered their job. So please, go ahead and show me where this happened.

I gave examples - but pretty much just "WW2" is a good place to start

No you didn't. You gave examples of massive scale operations that spanned territory larger than all four continents combined. Let me be clearer in what I'm asking. Individual battles, for example, infantry assaulting a neighborhood in some iraqi city. That is what I'm looking for. Because in PS2 that's what we deal with. Individual battles. You seriously think we can compare an attack on quartz ridge to operation overlord? Seriously? An attack on quartz ridge would be comparable to an attack on some small european village in the middle of nowhere. So provide me examples of where MASSIVE amounts of tanks aided infantry in besieging a specific, local target.

I mean if we used your examples and compared them to PS2. then even if we had only 5 tanks per battle it'd still be comparable as that's spread out across 4 continents, so there'd still be hundreds of tanks in play.

Battle of Hill 112, Battle of Villers-Bocage, Battle for Pegasus Bridge, pretty much ANY Battle in Arnhem during Market Garden, any skirmish along the front during the Battle of Mont Saint-Quentin.

That's what I've got off the top of my head under your very specific categorisation of what a combined arms battle is and isn't. Generally skirmishes are just that - skirmishes. So 50 guys attacking Quartz Ridge would be seen as a skirmish, and being PART of a larger battle.

Oh my I love the glorious noble vanguard.

Wow arguments about tanks are pretty emotional.

Ok you know what, I'm going to give up on this aspect of the argument because you just can't run a proper comparison. Even the battles you list involve 50 times as many people as would be in even the largest battle on PS2. And if I went "no, you gotta go smaller" you'd probably accuse me of shifting goal posts. However I will clarify exactly what I mean regardless. If you look at say, quartz ridge, how big of an area is that? How many people fight there? 50 NC vs 50 TR? That's spread across air, tanks, support vehicles, and infantry. Now compare that to a similar sized battle in real life. I aint talking entire battalions, which your recent string of examples were. I'm talking battles at the platoon level. If you have a platoon operating in a local area, not an area the size of indar which many of your recent examples were, but an area the size of quartz ridge/indar excavation. A platoon of infantry isn't going to have 20 tanks there giving them direct support. They'll have a small handful of tanks at most.

Basically, you are comparing battalion sized battles consisting of THOUSANDS of people that span areas larger than Indar to platoon level combat consisting of 50 people in a base the size of a typical residential neighborhood. This is how I've been viewing it and you obviously have been on a different page. In real life we have situations where platoons or squads attack small areas, like city blocks or what have you, and they never have two dozen tanks with them.

THANK YOU JESUS.

Fact remains that there's far too many tanks and the game would benefit heavily from taking a PS1 approach and having tanks be rarer but stronger.

That's not a fact, that's an opinion.

One I don't share. Tanks should be numerous glass cannons and more emphasis/reward for them and infantry co-operating together.

IN MY OPINION.

How do you propose a glass canon works with infantry if it's too afraid to lose it's camping position 400 meters away because if it actually stays with infantry it'll get it's *** handed to it because it's a glass canon?

Simple.

Remove C4 from jetpackers. And I say that as someone who primaries as Light Assault.

You gotta admit - that'd alleviate at least 90% of the C4 deaths tanks suffer, and tanks are already tough enough against most everything else. That way they're still at a good toughness level, can still die to C4 - but it's much harder for infantry to get there.

Also giving tanks other objectives and making bases more enclosed less spammable would help - though not how they did it on Esamir..that was just full ******.

That helps, but if they're on the front lines actively supporting infantry they're still getting pelted by rockets. A single rocket isn't much, but considering rockets are free and rearmed by an engi ammo pack even a handful of players can just hide behind cover and spam a billion rockets at the tank. Anyone who's played for more than an hour can recall memories of big battles and just how fast MBTs high-tail it backwards for repairs because 3-4 HAs decided to toss rockets their way. And if we're talking up close to bases then those same HAs can get in behind them and that's even fewer rockets.

So how do you address that? Because even if you remove C4 from LAs I can assure you tankers still wont get close to fights.

Don't bother with this guy, he recently told me that pulling a tank has no disadvantages.

As long as he's being civil and actually contemplating the issue I have no problem discussing things with him.

I have no memory of this - was I blackout drunk?

The video not sped up. I don't know about all the acceleration deceleration stuff though, I double tap S to stop and W to go fast.

I also hear you're quite the tanker, Alarox! Feel free to check out some of my other videos(It's mostly Vanguarding) and leave feedback on my gameplay and what I should improve!

And for you guys bickering in the thread, please chill out. It's just a game and it's not so unbalanced as you think. Hard counters are always annoying to face and they will obviously feel overpowered in the right situations. When I play air I hate flak/lockons, when I play tanks I hate air, ETC. Don't get mad, get even.

I'm referring to the biased and infantryside minded Iridar who was talking earlier in the thread. Apparently being able to be locked onto, having limited spawn locations, resource costs, being unable to cap points, being unable to enter certain bases, and having to own a tech plant to spawn for most places on the map aren't disadvantages to him.

I was referring to the guy you were arguing with on page 2 and he was claiming you were arguing with some self created reality of him and not the actual him lol

It's not really, Before you die you can jump out and become an infantry unit. Everything you do in a tank can be PURE bonus before you even start fighting as infantry.

If you choose to ONLY use the tank part you are hurting yourself just like if you choose to only play infiltrator and not play the other classes.

With the system the way it is now. I just pull anything and start driving and shooting and then jump out when I feel it might explode or it has taken me to where i want to go. I know I will be able to pull another when i die anways

Vanguard AP might as well have no bullet drop.