Can the Pact make real tanks?

Can the Pact make real tanks?

in Lore

Posted by: CHIPS.6018

CHIPS.6018

The Charr tanks in GW2 aren’t really tanks. They are more like dirt bikes used for speedy scouting and reconnaissance. And we only ever saw them used for scouting in the story (in Arah).

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Tank

Tanks in the real world are very different. They have 2 main usages.

1) Cover infantry advance against enemy fire. (As seen in WW1 in breaking though trenches)
2) Advance miles past the front line and then cut off enemies’ supply and retreat. (as seen in WW2 during the Blitzkrieg)

To do this, tanks must :

1) Have heavy armour (at least 12mm, as seen in British Mark I tanks.)
2) Able to move rapidly in rough terrain.
3) Offer significant protection (blocks incoming projectile attacks) for troops around.
4) Carry heavy fire power that sends unsupported infantry running in fear.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armoured_warfare

The Charr tanks are not real tanks because:

1) They do not have heavy armour. Nothing in their design (just look at them) indicate that they are designed with armour in mind. There is no way that they have 12mm steel armour; pretty much the minimum requirement to stop rifle bullets.

2) Their speed have never been demonstrated. But considering that they run on coal steam power, we can guess that they move slower than people walking. (e.g. 5mph)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-wheeled_steam_tank

And since the Charr tanks uses wheels instead of continuous track, its movement will be very slow in rough terrain.

3) From what we saw from the Charr tanks in Arah, it offers zero protection to troops around it. In fact it is a liability. Pact troops often have to risk their lives defending the tanks they were assigned to; pinning them down in the process. Pact soldiers are often better off fighting without tanks.

4) Charr tanks carries a very small cannon (most likely smaller than the weak 37mm cannon as seen on the Renault FT), which doesn’t post much threat.

Conclusion: The Pact should either produce some real tanks, or rename those Charr tanks to “Charr Scouting Bikes” (which fits their usage and description much more).

Examples of tank usage (for future reference):

Chipsy Chips(Necromancer) & Char Ashnoble(Thief)
The Order of Dii[Dii]-SBI→Kaineng→TC→JQ
Necro Encyclopedia-http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BrAjJ1N6hxs

(edited by CHIPS.6018)

Can the Pact make real tanks?

in Lore

Posted by: lakdav.3694

lakdav.3694

When there was that choice in the personal story to either save a tank column or secure a searing cauldron i of course chose the cauldron. I figured its more imporant, and that tanks could take care of themselves. I actually thought they meant those giant war-machines that they even show in the charr introNow those are tanks, even if slow. Not those weak-kitten bikes.

Can the Pact make real tanks?

in Lore

Posted by: Dustfinger.9510

Dustfinger.9510

Charr have a few different modles of tanks but their steam tech isn’t slow:

Attachments:

Can the Pact make real tanks?

in Lore

Posted by: knbBlackTemplar.3059

knbBlackTemplar.3059

Charr have a few different modles of tanks but their steam tech isn’t slow:

I bet 10km/h is quite speed for tanks

I’d sell my soul for ticket on Charr streetracing

80’s: Sylvari Necromancer (Main). Human: Thief, Warrior (PvP Main), Engineer. Charr Guardian

Can the Pact make real tanks?

in Lore

Posted by: Dustfinger.9510

Dustfinger.9510

I’d have a hard time looking myself in the mirror if I ever described anything going 6.2 mph as “lightning fast” or as a “monstrocity of pure power”.

Lol. Imagine what a middle aged charr would look like going through a midlife crisis. :-P Puttering along like the Shriners in their tiny cars.

Can the Pact make real tanks?

in Lore

Posted by: Stooperdale.3560

Stooperdale.3560

The Pact tanks in the invasion of Orr are more like mobile artillery. Considering the Pact can make a mobile battlesuit that provides plenty of mobility, armor, and firepower there isn’t much need for a conventional tank.

Can the Pact make real tanks?

in Lore

Posted by: pessimist.7294

pessimist.7294

The Pact tanks in the invasion of Orr are more like mobile artillery. Considering the Pact can make a mobile battlesuit that provides plenty of mobility, armor, and firepower there isn’t much need for a conventional tank.

I agree, the pact tanks looks more like self-propelled guns, they are not even support tanks.

Can the Pact make real tanks?

in Lore

Posted by: Konig Des Todes.2086

Konig Des Todes.2086

-snip-

Actually, charr tanks do have heavy armor, move rapidly in rough terrain (though not broken, muck-covered terrain like Orr due to the fact they have wheels rather than the belts of RL tanks), and carry heavy firepower; arguably it does your third point as well, though due to small size compared to the charr’s big size not so well for the charr.

So only your points 2 and 3 hold real merrit, because we see in the personal storyline that they offer heavy firepower (norn blackedout storyline and Vigil’s invasion into Cursed Shore storyline), and they do have heavy armor despite your claims of its look.

And as others noted loosely, those “charrmobile” tanks are not the only kind of tanks the charr have. Otherwise they wouldn’t be needing to clear out large portions of the Great Northern Wall to get them through.

Dear ANet writers,
Stop treating GW2 as a single story. Each Season and expansion should be their own story.

Can the Pact make real tanks?

in Lore

Posted by: Jelle.4623

Jelle.4623

what about these though

Attachments:

Can the Pact make real tanks?

in Lore

Posted by: pessimist.7294

pessimist.7294

Dont really looks like a tank. It may got a big cannon but like you can see its only possible to turn it in a 20-45 degree angle. Also its way too big and a easy target for AT-weapons.

Can the Pact make real tanks?

in Lore

Posted by: Bigtony.5089

Bigtony.5089

http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/6103/27652091.174/0_68023_2277442_XXXL that’s a tank, and it cant do 360 with his cannon.

Can the Pact make real tanks?

in Lore

Posted by: CHIPS.6018

CHIPS.6018

-snip-

Actually, charr tanks do have heavy armor, move rapidly in rough terrain (though not broken, muck-covered terrain like Orr due to the fact they have wheels rather than the belts of RL tanks), and carry heavy firepower; arguably it does your third point as well, though due to small size compared to the charr’s big size not so well for the charr.

So only your points 2 and 3 hold real merrit, because we see in the personal storyline that they offer heavy firepower (norn blackedout storyline and Vigil’s invasion into Cursed Shore storyline), and they do have heavy armor despite your claims of its look.

And as others noted loosely, those “charrmobile” tanks are not the only kind of tanks the charr have. Otherwise they wouldn’t be needing to clear out large portions of the Great Northern Wall to get them through.

Let me clarify for you why that Charr tank is not a tank.

Look at this video here.

1) Who is protecting who? The tanks should be at the FRONT to protect the solders. NOT having the soldiers up front to protect the tank. The tank should be up FRONT running over enemies and breaking though trench lines. NOT staying back and firing away (that’s the job of an artillery cannon, not a tank).

Now if the enemy have anti-tank guns, it is common to have foot soldiers advance first to take out these guns (even then, the tank would usually advance shortly after the infantry to try to take out those guns themselves). But that is not the case here.

2) The player cannot even enter the tank . She had to stand outside to use the tank’s main cannon. So the tank offers zero protection. It was the soldiers at the front line who protected the player (and the tank).

This Charr tank is an artillery cannon mounted on wheels running to steam power. That doesn’t make it a tank.

3) We never saw how “fast” these Charr tanks are. But given how easily they get stuck (as seen in Arah) and they run on coal steam power, it is doubtful they can break 5 mph (you can out-walk it).

4) When the enemies can just stand there and face-tank that Charr tank’s main cannon, it’s damage is too weak to put any sort of “fear” into the enemy. This means an enemy can carry an explosive, run to the tank, face-tank the first hit, plan the explosive onto tank, KABOOM.

If the Pact do not start making real tanks, then they should change the names of these Charr vehicles into something more fitting in their role: Scouting and Reconnaissance Bikes.

Chipsy Chips(Necromancer) & Char Ashnoble(Thief)
The Order of Dii[Dii]-SBI→Kaineng→TC→JQ
Necro Encyclopedia-http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BrAjJ1N6hxs

(edited by CHIPS.6018)

Can the Pact make real tanks?

in Lore

Posted by: CHIPS.6018

CHIPS.6018

what about these though

Judging from its size and it running on steam power, it probably move slower than 1 mph.

Its the same reason why they abandoned the project of Landkreuzer P. 1000 Ratte. Its going to be too big, too slow and too vulnerable to be of any use.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landkreuzer_P._1000_Ratte

It would be fine if the enemy does not have any tanks or anti-tank cannons (as with the Ascalonians, they got nothing.). In that case, this giant tank can be used as a transportable naval artillery piece. But any enemy with experience in tank warfare would have no problem disabling it.

It would also be fine if you have a good rail road system to transport that big machine around at a reasonable speed. But no one in the GW universe have trains yet.

http://exs.lv/upload/user325/2011-08/Landkreuzer_P1500.jpg

Chipsy Chips(Necromancer) & Char Ashnoble(Thief)
The Order of Dii[Dii]-SBI→Kaineng→TC→JQ
Necro Encyclopedia-http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BrAjJ1N6hxs

(edited by CHIPS.6018)

Can the Pact make real tanks?

in Lore

Posted by: pessimist.7294

pessimist.7294

http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/6103/27652091.174/0_68023_2277442_XXXL that’s a tank, and it cant do 360 with his cannon.

Thats not a tank. Its the M7 Priest, a self proppeled artillery.

Can the Pact make real tanks?

in Lore

Posted by: DarcShriek.5829

DarcShriek.5829

Dont really looks like a tank. It may got a big cannon but like you can see its only possible to turn it in a 20-45 degree angle. Also its way too big and a easy target for AT-weapons.

It’s not fair to compare Charr tanks to anything other than first generation tanks. By WWII there was over 40 years of tank design. However, I do agree with the OP that claiming the bikes to be tanks is silly. Especially when the charr have vehicles that seem better suited to the classification.

Can the Pact make real tanks?

in Lore

Posted by: CHIPS.6018

CHIPS.6018

http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/6103/27652091.174/0_68023_2277442_XXXL that’s a tank, and it cant do 360 with his cannon.

It does not have a rotating turret. That means it is a self-propelled gun.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-propelled_gun

Other names includes assault gun and tank destroyer.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_gun
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tank_destroyer

The benefit of an assault gun is that it have heavier armour than a tank (having turrets limits the armor amount). They also can carry a bigger calibre gun than a tank. They are also lower profile than a tank, making them harder to hit. They are also cheaper and easier to produce than tanks.

The disadvantage is its cannon cannot aim nearly as well as a tank. That makes tank the better multi-role vehicle, while assault guns are better at taking out armoured vehicles.

“A tank destroyer is a type of armored fighting vehicle armed with a gun or missile launcher, and is designed specifically to engage enemy armored vehicles. Tanks are generally armoured fighting vehicles designed for front-line combat which combines operational mobility and tactical offensive and defensive capabilities and perform all primary tasks of the armoured troops on the battlefield; the tank destroyer on the other hand is specifically designed mainly for taking on enemy armour.1 Many have been based on a tracked tank chassis, while others are wheeled.”

Chipsy Chips(Necromancer) & Char Ashnoble(Thief)
The Order of Dii[Dii]-SBI→Kaineng→TC→JQ
Necro Encyclopedia-http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BrAjJ1N6hxs

(edited by CHIPS.6018)

Can the Pact make real tanks?

in Lore

Posted by: DietPepsi.4371

DietPepsi.4371

I don’t think they’re bikes.
Motorcycle definition: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/motorbike
Bike definition: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/bicycle

But I agree with CHIPS that they’re like Self Propelled Guns, or just ‘reconnaissance vehicles’: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FV101_Scorpion

You stand to benefit more from making friends than making enemies.

Also I hate my user ID.

(edited by DietPepsi.4371)

Can the Pact make real tanks?

in Lore

Posted by: Konig Des Todes.2086

Konig Des Todes.2086

Let me clarify for you why that Charr tank is not a tank.

Look at this video here.

1) Who is protecting who? The tanks should be at the FRONT to protect the solders. NOT having the soldiers up front to protect the tank. The tank should be up FRONT running over enemies and breaking though trench lines. NOT staying back and firing away (that’s the job of an artillery cannon, not a tank).

Now if the enemy have anti-tank guns, it is common to have foot soldiers advance first to take out these guns (even then, the tank would usually advance shortly after the infantry to try to take out those guns themselves). But that is not the case here.

2) The player cannot even enter the tank . She had to stand outside to use the tank’s main cannon. So the tank offers zero protection. It was the soldiers at the front line who protected the player (and the tank).

This Charr tank is an artillery cannon mounted on wheels running to steam power. That doesn’t make it a tank.

3) We never saw how “fast” these Charr tanks are. But given how easily they get stuck (as seen in Arah) and they run on coal steam power, it is doubtful they can break 5 mph (you can out-walk it).

4) When the enemies can just stand there and face-tank that Charr tank’s main cannon, it’s damage is too weak to put any sort of “fear” into the enemy. This means an enemy can carry an explosive, run to the tank, face-tank the first hit, plan the explosive onto tank, KABOOM.

If the Pact do not start making real tanks, then they should change the names of these Charr vehicles into something more fitting in their role: Scouting and Reconnaissance Bikes.

1) Not all tanks are meant to go before the infantry.

2) Mechanics. Isn’t it completely SHOCKING that there are mechanics that cannot be taken as lore? If ArenaNet hadn’t kitten their entire game’s mechanics and aesthetics, you can bet your kitten that you’d be standing atop of the gun or your model disappeared and camera showing as if you’re in the tank.

3) Actually we do see how fast they move in Orr. And as someone pointed out they do races with these. Not much of a race if you can outrun them on foot.

4) Y’know, most enemies I fight except things like Risen Giants and Risen Abominations get one-shotted by the tanks in Orr. So either you have a crappy experience, aim, or whatever, or we’re playing two completely different games.

Also: Balance Mechanics.

Yeah, they’re not standard tanks. But they sure as hell aren’t as bad as you make them to be. It’s really tiring to see folks like you complain about far more than what’s actually wrong with the game.

Dear ANet writers,
Stop treating GW2 as a single story. Each Season and expansion should be their own story.

Can the Pact make real tanks?

in Lore

Posted by: Dustfinger.9510

Dustfinger.9510

the whole basis for the pact renaming them is flawed. The pact has no outside experience with tanks other than what the charr have given them and what they have built themselves. But if the charr invented them and decided to call them tanks. Then that’s what they are since nothing else in the world was a tank before the charr invented them.

So the charr tanks also fit the definition of a tank destroyer. But without actual tanks, there is no such thing as a tank destroyer. So……

Can the Pact make real tanks?

in Lore

Posted by: draxynnic.3719

draxynnic.3719

To be honest…

It’s actually a bit silly that the term “tank” gets used at all. Historically, that term came up as a security measure to hide what they were really building from the Germans – languages that didn’t simply borrow the word “tank” from English usually use descriptive terms (“panzerkraftwagon” – armoured attack car) or draw parallels with other historical war machines (the French “char” also being French for “chariot”, for instance). The charr had no real reason to employ such counterespionage strategies and no-one would believe their “tanks” are actually self-propelled water tanks anyway (the supposed use of the tank according to the cover-up was as a means of carrying large quantities of water… which is believable when you look at the outside of a British Mk 1 without the guns…) so I’d expect the term to be something more like “armoured car” – which is more accurate to their appearance.

As to their role, I’d say they’re definitely SPGs. Still quite useful from the perspective of fighting a medievalesque opponent (albeit one with magic, giants, and flying creatures) and given the parameters of the conflict, that the enemies of the charr aren’t exactly well-endowed with armour piercing weapons (of the kind that adding more armour is going to help against, anyway) and that the primitive engines they use probably aren’t producing much motive power, it makes sense that armour is probably going to be the lowest priority after firepower and adequate mobility.

Still, through today’s military parlance, they’re turreted wheeled SPGs, not tanks.

To those who think Scarlet hate means she’s succeeded as a villain:
People don’t hate Scarlet like Game of Thrones fans hate Joffrey.
They hate her the way Star Wars fans hate Jar Jar Binks.

Can the Pact make real tanks?

in Lore

Posted by: CHIPS.6018

CHIPS.6018

Let me clarify for you why that Charr tank is not a tank.

Look at this video here.

1) Who is protecting who? The tanks should be at the FRONT to protect the solders. NOT having the soldiers up front to protect the tank. The tank should be up FRONT running over enemies and breaking though trench lines. NOT staying back and firing away (that’s the job of an artillery cannon, not a tank).

Now if the enemy have anti-tank guns, it is common to have foot soldiers advance first to take out these guns (even then, the tank would usually advance shortly after the infantry to try to take out those guns themselves). But that is not the case here.

2) The player cannot even enter the tank . She had to stand outside to use the tank’s main cannon. So the tank offers zero protection. It was the soldiers at the front line who protected the player (and the tank).

This Charr tank is an artillery cannon mounted on wheels running to steam power. That doesn’t make it a tank.

3) We never saw how “fast” these Charr tanks are. But given how easily they get stuck (as seen in Arah) and they run on coal steam power, it is doubtful they can break 5 mph (you can out-walk it).

4) When the enemies can just stand there and face-tank that Charr tank’s main cannon, it’s damage is too weak to put any sort of “fear” into the enemy. This means an enemy can carry an explosive, run to the tank, face-tank the first hit, plan the explosive onto tank, KABOOM.

If the Pact do not start making real tanks, then they should change the names of these Charr vehicles into something more fitting in their role: Scouting and Reconnaissance Bikes.

1) Not all tanks are meant to go before the infantry.

2) Mechanics. Isn’t it completely SHOCKING that there are mechanics that cannot be taken as lore? If ArenaNet hadn’t kitten their entire game’s mechanics and aesthetics, you can bet your kitten that you’d be standing atop of the gun or your model disappeared and camera showing as if you’re in the tank.

3) Actually we do see how fast they move in Orr. And as someone pointed out they do races with these. Not much of a race if you can outrun them on foot.

4) Y’know, most enemies I fight except things like Risen Giants and Risen Abominations get one-shotted by the tanks in Orr. So either you have a crappy experience, aim, or whatever, or we’re playing two completely different games.

Also: Balance Mechanics.

Yeah, they’re not standard tanks. But they sure as hell aren’t as bad as you make them to be. It’s really tiring to see folks like you complain about far more than what’s actually wrong with the game.

1) Konig, you surely knows lore very well. But I doubt you understand anything about armour warfare. Tanks never stays behind infantry unless the enemy have anti tank guns.

Look at these pictures. Infantry are always behind the tanks because it gives them protection. Its very simple logic really.

http://iabsi.com/gen/public/images/Soviet%20tanks%20and%20infantry%20at%20Dukla.jpg
http://ww2db.com/images/vehicle_t34_11.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/27/Marine_infantrymen_take_cover_behind_a_tank_while_it_fires_on_Communist_troops_ahead_HD-SN-99-03079.jpg/1125px-Marine_infantrymen_take_cover_behind_a_tank_while_it_fires_on_Communist_troops_ahead_HD-SN-99-03079.jpg

2) Mechanics doesn’t apply here. Even in GW1 the player can ride the devourer and Junundu into battle, and the player is protected by taking on that beast’s health.
http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Charr_Siege_Devourer

The most basic idea is for soldier to stay INSIDE a tank and fire away. If they cannot even do that, the weapon is NO LONGER a tank. It is more like a non-armored self propelled artillery. Pretty much a cannon mounted onto a jeep.

If they feel this is required for game play balance, then stop calling these Charr vehicles tanks. They are anything but tanks.

3) I don’t remember seeing them move fast ever. When in Arah these Charr tanks are always stuck in the mud or broken down, and Pact soldiers have to risk their lives defending them.

In WW2, if you tank is disabled and cannot be retrieved, you blow it up with your own explosives and move on. End of story. Lives are always worth more than a tank.

4) It is funny you say that, because I just linked a video showing how the Charr tank’s main gun DO NOT one hit kill enemies.

Chipsy Chips(Necromancer) & Char Ashnoble(Thief)
The Order of Dii[Dii]-SBI→Kaineng→TC→JQ
Necro Encyclopedia-http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BrAjJ1N6hxs

(edited by CHIPS.6018)

Can the Pact make real tanks?

in Lore

Posted by: draxynnic.3719

draxynnic.3719

2) is a bit weird. Lore-wise, the gunner IS inside the “tank” – we see this when “tanks” are operating independently rather than being manned by a player. The mission in question really should have had the player inside the “tank”, so it’s surprising that they aren’t.

I’d suspect it has to do with the tank being treated mechanically there as a fixed emplacement, rather than a mount that you can move like the golem suits and the GW1 examples. Probably because ArenaNet hasn’t developed the code to make a wheeled vehicle in the GW2 engine behave as you’d expect a wheeled vehicle to behave, rather than behaving like a walker.

On 4)… this depends on where the “tank” is, really. Some of them do one-hit kill, others don’t. Same with the bigger guns you see as emplacements elsewhere (consider those cannons outside the Pact rally point, for instance – to look at them I’d expect them to be at least 105s, but you often see them doing practically nothing to the Risen they fire at because they don’t break the mob’s out-of-combat regeneration and they just heal up between shots).

It could be a question of ammunition quality, or it could purely be lore-mechanics separation (they don’t want the “tanks” to overshadow the players, so when they’re part of an event they’re anemic, while when they’re available for player use they have to be powerful enough to justify the player using them). However, there certainly are cases of the “tanks” being able to one-hit kill, or at least two-hit kill large areas.

To those who think Scarlet hate means she’s succeeded as a villain:
People don’t hate Scarlet like Game of Thrones fans hate Joffrey.
They hate her the way Star Wars fans hate Jar Jar Binks.

Can the Pact make real tanks?

in Lore

Posted by: CHIPS.6018

CHIPS.6018

@ draxynnic

Yeah, they should have gave anti tank guns (or anti tank spells, anti tank giant fireball, etc) to the enemies along side the introduction of tanks. Then they can add that tank & infantry teamwork element to the game; adding more depth to the game play.

Chipsy Chips(Necromancer) & Char Ashnoble(Thief)
The Order of Dii[Dii]-SBI→Kaineng→TC→JQ
Necro Encyclopedia-http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BrAjJ1N6hxs

(edited by CHIPS.6018)

Can the Pact make real tanks?

in Lore

Posted by: Dustfinger.9510

Dustfinger.9510

1) Konig, you surely knows lore very well. But I doubt you understand anything about armour warfare. Tanks never stays behind infantry unless the enemy have anti tank guns.

As a Marine who served in an anti-tank CAAT Plt, I can say that this is a very simplistic view to the point of being wrong. Modern warfare is much more complicated than heavy front line unless they have a counter to your heavy frontline. Anti-tank weapons are mobile and numerous. Tanks are fully capable of hanging back and bouncing their payload across the ground for great distances to engage other armored vehicles. While other unit types can and will take the lead.

Can the Pact make real tanks?

in Lore

Posted by: CHIPS.6018

CHIPS.6018

1) Konig, you surely knows lore very well. But I doubt you understand anything about armour warfare. Tanks never stays behind infantry unless the enemy have anti tank guns.

As a Marine who served in an anti-tank CAAT Plt, I can say that this is a very simplistic view to the point of being wrong. Modern warfare is much more complicated than heavy front line unless they have a counter to your heavy frontline. Anti-tank weapons are mobile and numerous. Tanks are fully capable of hanging back and bouncing their payload across the ground for great distances to engage other armored vehicles. While other unit types can and will take the lead.

Yes today is very different. Cannons can fire much further than before. There are plenty of infantry weapons (like the AT4 and Javelin) that allows him to take out a tank. And the air force are more deadly than ever.

I was more referring to WW1 and WW2. That’s a bit closer to the GW2 universe. There what I said holds true.

The infantry only advance ahead of tanks if they need to deal with anti tank weapons.

If the enemy do not have any anti tank weaponry, there is little reason not to advance the tanks first to protect the infantry.

http://www.lonesentry.com/articles/misc_dec42/index.html

“a. Tank Objectives

Tanks set out to attack the enemy’s infantry and infantry heavy weapons, artillery, command posts, reserves, and rear communications. But before they can get through to these targets, they must destroy their most dangerous enemy, the antitank defenses. For this reason the heaviest and most powerful tanks must lead the attack, and they must be supported by the other troops, infantry and artillery, both before and during the attack. The heaviest tanks should be directed to attack the points that are deepest within the enemy positions, such as artillery, reserves, and command posts. The lighter tanks attack the infantry. Each wave of tanks should be given a specific objective."

Chipsy Chips(Necromancer) & Char Ashnoble(Thief)
The Order of Dii[Dii]-SBI→Kaineng→TC→JQ
Necro Encyclopedia-http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BrAjJ1N6hxs

(edited by CHIPS.6018)

Can the Pact make real tanks?

in Lore

Posted by: Dustfinger.9510

Dustfinger.9510

So going back to the point of who should be in front of who, in WWI and II it was common for troops to advance in conjunction with tanks. Your own link said that only the “heaviest” tanks advanced first. The tank we protect is clearly not the heaviest Tyria has to offer. The infantry that advanced with the lighter tanks did protect them from sabotage as the lighter tanks took out targets that weren’t immediately on them. You’ve just demonstrated how your original argument about how troops shouldn’t be risking their lives for the tank is flawed.

(edited by Dustfinger.9510)

Can the Pact make real tanks?

in Lore

Posted by: CHIPS.6018

CHIPS.6018

So going back to the point of who should be in front of who, in WWI and II it was common for troops to advance in conjunction with tanks. Your own link said that only the “heaviest” tanks advanced first. The tank we protect is clearly not the heaviest Tyria has to offer. The infantry that advanced with the lighter tanks did protect them from sabotage as the lighter tanks took out targets that weren’t immediately on them. You’ve just demonstrated how your original argument about how troops shouldn’t be risking their lives for the tank is flawed.

Perhaps you misunderstood me. I never said that infantry would never die for tanks. What I said was if the tank is already disabled, and it cannot be retrieved (e.g. this position is about to be overrun by enemies), the soldiers would blow the tank up to prevent an enemy capture before escaping.

Infantry do advance at the same time as tanks, with infantry slightly behind the tanks for protection. Only when needed, the infantry would charge slightly ahead of the tanks to (as you said) fight against sabotages and anti tank weapons.

In fact Soviets love using this tactic call Tank Desant during WW2, to make sure the infantry is right behind the tank to support it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tank_desant

In my earlier GW video, we see the infantry advanced well ahead of the tank. So in that video, the tank was pretty much a stationary artillery. This is not how a tank is used in WW2.

In case you hasn’t seen it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a7KroXu0TAo

A tank should be in front running over enemies and their defensive positions, firing the main gun to blow up the enemies, etc. After the enemies are weakened, the infantry goes in to finish the job.

And TBH, tanks rarely fights by itself. You rarely deal with one tank. Tanks usually fight as a battalion.

Chipsy Chips(Necromancer) & Char Ashnoble(Thief)
The Order of Dii[Dii]-SBI→Kaineng→TC→JQ
Necro Encyclopedia-http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BrAjJ1N6hxs

(edited by CHIPS.6018)

Can the Pact make real tanks?

in Lore

Posted by: Dustfinger.9510

Dustfinger.9510

Hmmm. The very light tank we see in that GW vid isn’t built like our own heavier tanks. So that particular model being used as mobile artillery seems to be playing to it’s strength. I could see what you would be saying if it was one of the heavier models the charr have but it’s not. Having that light tank advance in front of the troops would only put it in a uneccesarliy vulnerable position. Especially since we can see that it is fully capable of firing over it’s own troops and into enemy ranks the way we use modern tanks today. (And likely, for the same reason. Because they can be taken out)

In combat there is no hard and fast rule for how a weapon is “supposed to be used”. There is only general guidelines that are dictated by tendancies. because so much of it is highly dependant on the battlefield situation. Especially since the Tyrian tanks have such vastly different models who will have different advantages and disadvantages. If that tank can be fixed, it is no different than reviving the engineers in Orr to fix the catapults in order to hold a strategic position. It’s a tacticle descision to hold a position until the "cavalry " gets there. In the case where they repair the tank. The tank would be the cavalry.

Edit: The way that small tank is used isn’t wrong. It’s smart because the pact doesn’t seem to have the resources to field a battalion of them at that moment. It is being used like an archer unit. Except that archer unit has explosive arrows for more damage and and light armor for greater protection. It’s like saying that an army could field an entire battalion of archers/riflemen on their front line. Sure they could if they had the resources. And they would be highly effective as long as their arrows can penetrate the enemies armor (the way the tanks ammo can) but with fewer tanks/archers, it is wiser to keep them at a distance where they can do the the most damage with the least risk of having your powerful weapon taken out.

(edited by Dustfinger.9510)

Can the Pact make real tanks?

in Lore

Posted by: pessimist.7294

pessimist.7294

Summed up we humans should construct and build the tanks of Tyria instead of the other races^^

Can the Pact make real tanks?

in Lore

Posted by: Dustfinger.9510

Dustfinger.9510

Idk. Humanity in Tyria tends to favor artisan crafting techniques. Without the charr industrial machine backing them, they might fall prey to the same lack of resources that keeps the Pact from fielding more tanks.

Can the Pact make real tanks?

in Lore

Posted by: Narcemus.1348

Narcemus.1348

Human tanks would be pretty though!

Can the Pact make real tanks?

in Lore

Posted by: Dustfinger.9510

Dustfinger.9510

That they would. They’d be that artistic steam punk rather than the roughshod raw iron we get from the charr.

Can the Pact make real tanks?

in Lore

Posted by: CHIPS.6018

CHIPS.6018

Summed up we humans should construct and build the tanks of Tyria instead of the other races^^

Nah the Charrs already made the tanks. Humans must build a different kind of war machine. For example, giant magical walkers (bigger versions of the Watchknights). H. G. Wells’ war machines will save humanity. :P

Lore explaination: Humans cut a bloodstone into 100 pieces, and put one piece into each war machine. So each walker have 1% of the magic that ever existed in the times of the gods.

Chipsy Chips(Necromancer) & Char Ashnoble(Thief)
The Order of Dii[Dii]-SBI→Kaineng→TC→JQ
Necro Encyclopedia-http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BrAjJ1N6hxs

(edited by CHIPS.6018)

Can the Pact make real tanks?

in Lore

Posted by: zoidberg.7801

zoidberg.7801

The thing is we have no idea when tanks were even developed in the gw2 universe. They seem like a very recent invention, and so the charr could be still working on developing them. As far as we know only the Iron Legion had them, and who were they fighting before? That’s right, the fortress of Ebonhawke. Because of this, it seems only logical that their tanks would be more like artillery pieces. The Pact seems to have only had the tanks for a few months at most, and because they seem to be only a charr invention, the other troops in the Pact probably didn’t know much about them.

Kaineng 4 lyfe yo
Samuel Stormwalker

Can the Pact make real tanks?

in Lore

Posted by: draxynnic.3719

draxynnic.3719

I was more referring to WW1 and WW2. That’s a bit closer to the GW2 universe. There what I said holds true.

I think this is actually the flaw in your thinking.

While Charr technology is on a similar level to WW1 technology, the charr and the Pact aren’t facing the same tactical and technological challenges that lead to the development of what we think of as tanks.

The original tanks were developed in response to the no-mans land of trenches, barbed wire and machine guns seen in WW1, which rendered infantry charges virtually suicidal. In developing their so-called tanks, the charr did not face this problem – a charge of Blood Legion warriors is still a perfectly effective assault force, and the only no-man’s land situation they had to face was the walls outside of Ebonhawke (which a tank can’t simply roll over the way it can over barbed wire and trenches). What it seems they needed was an SPG that could be mass-produced in greater numbers than siege devourers could be raised – and since the “tanks” do seem to be roughly on-par with siege devourers in terms of firepower and durability, it seems they’ve succeeded there.

Ironically, in role, the dredge APCs are probably more in line with WW1 tanks as a breakthrough weapon. Those big charr war engines that we never see actually move or fight are also closer to WW1 tanks – yes, they don’t have turrets, but that’s actually something they have in common with most WW1 tanks (the turret wasn’t actually all THAT important in WW1 circumstances, it was in the more mobile fighting in WW2 where it became more important and the distinction between tanks and assault guns was made).

On your point earlier about giving the enemies antitank weapons and such to better represent the relationship between tanks and infantry: this is something I disagree with. First, with most enemies in the game, there’s no reason to expect them to develop antitank weapons. Second, GW2 isn’t trying to be a WW1/WW2 simulator, but a fantasy MMO with steampunk elements. As intimated above, you could replace the “tanks” with siege devourers and things would be much the same.

As much as it pains to say it, the most likely faction at this point in time to develop what we would regard as conventional tanks is the Molten Alliance – they have the technological base and the incentive to develop things intended to counter charr weapons. Next most likely is probably humans – they don’t have quite so much technology and incentive, but they have some technological know-how and the possibility of the Ascalonian war reigniting has to remain high in the thoughts of human leaders.

To those who think Scarlet hate means she’s succeeded as a villain:
People don’t hate Scarlet like Game of Thrones fans hate Joffrey.
They hate her the way Star Wars fans hate Jar Jar Binks.

Can the Pact make real tanks?

in Lore

Posted by: CHIPS.6018

CHIPS.6018

The thing is we have no idea when tanks were even developed in the gw2 universe. They seem like a very recent invention, and so the charr could be still working on developing them. As far as we know only the Iron Legion had them, and who were they fighting before? That’s right, the fortress of Ebonhawke. Because of this, it seems only logical that their tanks would be more like artillery pieces. The Pact seems to have only had the tanks for a few months at most, and because they seem to be only a charr invention, the other troops in the Pact probably didn’t know much about them.

This can very well be the case. Charr’s tanks might still be in their prototype stage. If so, in probably 5 years (storyline time) they will be operational.

I think human technology are not worst than Charr’s. In fact humans might be better. The human made Watchknights are much more sophisticated than Charr tanks. They have their own AI, meaning they can fight independently and do not need a driver. Each can use all the spells and attack skills avaliable, meaning that they are not limited by professions like humans are(humans takes 10+ years to master a profession. Watchknights knows all of it the second it was made.). It can use mesmer spells to change its appearance, making them perfect for spy missions. One Watchknight can fight Logan Thackeray, champion of humans, to nearly a stand still.

Both humans are Charrs are going the steampunk route. The way I see it, Charrs are going for easy to produce, mass amount of tanks. This fits their higher population size.

Humans on the other hand are going for harder (more sophisticated) to produce, but stronger walker type of weapons. This fits their lower population, meaning each human must kill more Charrs for the war to be even.

Maybe in 5 years, a human walker Watchknight Mark VI will look like this. :P

http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com/736x/5c/84/0c/5c840c236e1682f3206862becd8472a0.jpg

It is ashame that we saw more Twisted Clockwork enemies than Watchknight allies, so we are not sure exactly how strong is one Watchknight. But it was indicated that Queen Jennah and Anise plan to slowly replace her front line troops with Watchknights, to cut down human causalities in battle.

Chipsy Chips(Necromancer) & Char Ashnoble(Thief)
The Order of Dii[Dii]-SBI→Kaineng→TC→JQ
Necro Encyclopedia-http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BrAjJ1N6hxs

(edited by CHIPS.6018)

Can the Pact make real tanks?

in Lore

Posted by: draxynnic.3719

draxynnic.3719

I don’t think the Watchknights indicate a technological superiority over the charr. What the Watchknights appear to be is a sort of middle ground between the pure technomagic of the asura and the pure technology of the charr – they have clockwork components in them so that they can reduce the amount of magic required to sustain them, but there’s no technological engine or computer in there – the motive power and sentience of the Watchknights is provided by magical enchantments.

I would also contest the idea that every Watchknight has the skills of all the professions at their fingertips. Those seen in the arena have likely been specially programmed and enchanted for their role, and there’s nothing to say that a random watchknight programmed to take the role of, say, a centaur can turn around and be a bandit or a destroyer instead. The potential is there, but the more abilities you program into the Watchknight, the more investment it takes from the artificers enchanting it to grant it those capabilities. For the purpose of mass production, it’s probably much more efficient to just program each Watchknight with a single role, or even, outside of the arena, to simply have it fight as a Watchknight and not bother with illusions in the first place.

Which is another consideration on the idea that watchknights have all abilities – those we see in the arena have been programmed by mesmers, and it’s possible, even likely, that everything we saw in the arena were simply illusions that our characters responded to as if they were real – similar to how a mesmer’s phantasms can mimic skills from another profession. While game mechanics don’t really draw a strict distinction between, say, an illusory bullet and a real one, I suspect that lorewise there are situations where an illusion just won’t do and you need the real thing.

To those who think Scarlet hate means she’s succeeded as a villain:
People don’t hate Scarlet like Game of Thrones fans hate Joffrey.
They hate her the way Star Wars fans hate Jar Jar Binks.

Can the Pact make real tanks?

in Lore

Posted by: Narcemus.1348

Narcemus.1348

Perhaps when the illusion was destroyed and the watchknight attacks with the purple beam from it’s hands, this is what was basically happening the whole time, but our minds were reading the scenario as a destroyer dropping a molten rock on our head.

Can the Pact make real tanks?

in Lore

Posted by: pessimist.7294

pessimist.7294

The danger with machines like the Watchknights is that they can be hacked and reprogrammed like Scarlet did. If queen Jennah really replaces their front soldiers with them its rather a new risk than a relief for the troops since they always have to be prepared to fight against their own weapons. Also if the Watchknights got a AI there is still the possibility that it will develop on its own and turn against the human. (Seen like in Terminator) Charr tanks might not be effective like the watchknights but you can be sure it wont turn on you.

Can the Pact make real tanks?

in Lore

Posted by: draxynnic.3719

draxynnic.3719

Which is why they’ve been withdrawn from service until they iron out the security hole that Scarlet found. Golems still work for the asura with all their flaws and vulnerabilities, though – as long as you remain aware of and ready for the risk, the watchknights would probably be a net benefit.

Particularly since most enemies of humanity do not have the skills Scarlet does – against anyone else, a Watchknight is probably more reliable than a human soldier (cannot be bribed or demoralised, unlikely to turn traitor short of being hacked, probably less susceptible to draconic corruption than a human). Even if you removed what made Scarlet a Sue she’d still be a highly accomplished engineer and golemancer, so it makes sense that she’d be able to figure out the weaknesses of the watchknights (particularly if she had someone on the inside the whole time) – short of a war between Kryta and Rata Sum and/or the Inquest, though, it’s likely that nobody else has that capability.

If Scarlet had been killed in Clockwork Chaos, the watchknights would probably be being deployed against the centaurs, and possibly in Orr, now despite the vulnerability, with Jennah confident that the centaurs and Risen don’t have the capability to hack into them. It’s just that with Scarlet out there and obviously knowing the vulnerability, deploying them anywhere has too great a risk of simply giving them over to Scarlet.

To those who think Scarlet hate means she’s succeeded as a villain:
People don’t hate Scarlet like Game of Thrones fans hate Joffrey.
They hate her the way Star Wars fans hate Jar Jar Binks.

Can the Pact make real tanks?

in Lore

Posted by: CHIPS.6018

CHIPS.6018

I was more referring to WW1 and WW2. That’s a bit closer to the GW2 universe. There what I said holds true.

I think this is actually the flaw in your thinking.

While Charr technology is on a similar level to WW1 technology, the charr and the Pact aren’t facing the same tactical and technological challenges that lead to the development of what we think of as tanks.

The original tanks were developed in response to the no-mans land of trenches, barbed wire and machine guns seen in WW1, which rendered infantry charges virtually suicidal. In developing their so-called tanks, the charr did not face this problem – a charge of Blood Legion warriors is still a perfectly effective assault force, and the only no-man’s land situation they had to face was the walls outside of Ebonhawke (which a tank can’t simply roll over the way it can over barbed wire and trenches). What it seems they needed was an SPG that could be mass-produced in greater numbers than siege devourers could be raised – and since the “tanks” do seem to be roughly on-par with siege devourers in terms of firepower and durability, it seems they’ve succeeded there.

Ironically, in role, the dredge APCs are probably more in line with WW1 tanks as a breakthrough weapon. Those big charr war engines that we never see actually move or fight are also closer to WW1 tanks – yes, they don’t have turrets, but that’s actually something they have in common with most WW1 tanks (the turret wasn’t actually all THAT important in WW1 circumstances, it was in the more mobile fighting in WW2 where it became more important and the distinction between tanks and assault guns was made).

On your point earlier about giving the enemies antitank weapons and such to better represent the relationship between tanks and infantry: this is something I disagree with. First, with most enemies in the game, there’s no reason to expect them to develop antitank weapons. Second, GW2 isn’t trying to be a WW1/WW2 simulator, but a fantasy MMO with steampunk elements. As intimated above, you could replace the “tanks” with siege devourers and things would be much the same.

As much as it pains to say it, the most likely faction at this point in time to develop what we would regard as conventional tanks is the Molten Alliance – they have the technological base and the incentive to develop things intended to counter charr weapons. Next most likely is probably humans – they don’t have quite so much technology and incentive, but they have some technological know-how and the possibility of the Ascalonian war reigniting has to remain high in the thoughts of human leaders.

Sorry for the delay response in this. I only find the time to reply to this. :P

I agree that the GW universe is different from the history of the earth. Trench warfare wasn’t why the Charrs made the tanks. They made those “scouting bikes” in order to scout ahead. And they made those “Giant Tanks” in order to mount a cannon big enough to crumble the wall in Ebonhawke.

The Elder dragons awoke before these Giant Tanks could be completed/deployed. Else Ebonhawke would be done. Next would be the Divinity’s Reach. That’s how close humans was to total annihilation and turns into farm food animals for the Charr. The Elder Dragons “saved” humanity more than the 5 gods ever did.

The urgent need of countering Charr tanks must be on Queen Jennah’s mind. I don’t think she is that naive to think this fragile alliance will last after the death of the elder dragons.

(If not, Shane Walsh will say “You are too soft. You can never make the tough calls needed for us to survive. You don’t have what it takes to protect them. Let Minister Caudecus take over.”) :P

I agree that Charr tanks are slightly ahead of their competition right now. It might very well be that humans currently do not have any anti tank weapons.

But as with Earth’s history, anti tank weapon came AFTER the invention of tanks. It is a continous cycle of inventions and counter-inventions in the weapon development cycle. When the enemy made a super weapon (e.g. WWI tanks), the other side must development a counter measure quickly or face elimination.

I can see humans making use of anti tank guns, mines (already exist) and trenches in the near future. I also hope for the further develop the Watchknights.

Chipsy Chips(Necromancer) & Char Ashnoble(Thief)
The Order of Dii[Dii]-SBI→Kaineng→TC→JQ
Necro Encyclopedia-http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BrAjJ1N6hxs

(edited by CHIPS.6018)

Can the Pact make real tanks?

in Lore

Posted by: draxynnic.3719

draxynnic.3719

Actually, there is mention of tanks in Ghosts of Ascalon and there are a few tanks of the older variety around charr installations in the area (in fact, possibly more of them than in the Black Citadel).

It’s also mentioned in both Ghosts of Ascalon and one of the Citadel of Flames explorable mode paths that the Ebon Vanguard have got very good at destroying the charr war machines, or at least stopping them from getting into a good firing position. So it seems that, whether in the form of planted explosives, other obstacles, magic, Ebonhawke’s own siege weapons, or other means, Ebonhawke managed to find enough countermeasures to tanks to keep them from being decisive.

(Just like World War 1, in fact – Germany never really had enough tanks in that war to make any difference, but they still held their own from the Battle of Flers-Courcelette in late 1916 (when tanks were first used in action) until around summer 1918. Instead, they found other ways to deal with tanks – when the tanks didn’t simply bog or break down themselves, as they were prone to do (and those massive charr war engines are probably even MORE prone to). From a strategic perspective, in fact, it’s questionable whether tanks actually made a difference to the outcome of that war. It may have sped things up a little, but ultimately, Germany surrendered in WW1 because it realised it was inevitably losing the war of attrition rather than being decisively beaten in the field.)

To those who think Scarlet hate means she’s succeeded as a villain:
People don’t hate Scarlet like Game of Thrones fans hate Joffrey.
They hate her the way Star Wars fans hate Jar Jar Binks.