Whats better halftrack or tank? page 2

32 posts

Flag Post
Originally posted by yiu113:
Originally posted by Brutalized:
Originally posted by Dserra:

wow arguing with Brutalized and Zepplid you guys got guts. anywho the one that is better is up to you I get the Halftrack at first then save up for tank.but still in my eyes neither are better you still have to have infantry support for both of them they can both can be taken out by the Antitank gun and both can do FF so stop arguing.

Exactly, the only ones that don’t friendly fire your troops are the Quad fifty, the medic, and the HQ. The HQ has been proven to be bugged, and the 22 TP hospital does the same thing as a 3 TP medic.

The 25 TP Quad fifty, however, makes up for its cost. Fiftys cost 6 apiece, so the cost for four would be 24, and with a gunner attached, it’s a pretty good deal.

Not to mention, they can move.

Also, on your comment of no friendly fire, I’ve actualyl somehow managed to never experience friendly fire with my tank.

Might be because I keep my tank in the front and everything else near the back.

True, i do too, I usally just use my starting squad and wait for me to earn 20 TP, then i get the tank, and taunt… a lot.

 
Flag Post

For the most part, I use a Half Track, and save up for a tank. A tank with the .50 turret, plus half track with cannon… It’ll handle almost anything that comes your way, no prob.

 
Flag Post

I like using the Halftrack with Field HQ, It basically provides a bunch of passive bonuses that while they don’t actively contribute THAT much, can definitely help, however the main reason why I choose to use the Halftrack with the HQ upgrade, is because for whatever reason, the gunner can’t be shot out, or at least, in all of the times I’ve used him he never has been, I’ve gotten messages saying “Fragmentation Killed the Gunner” or something like that, but he stays alive (and, yes, he does still shoot), and the HT keeps moving.

I absolutely despise using tanks, simply because of the friendly fire, for that matter, I don’t really like to use HT’s either, however, the HT can’t kill itself and manages to keep a fairly competent gunner position, with a good bit of armor, so it’s not bad.

 
Flag Post

Actually, I think someone a while back mentioned that the passives on the HQ were broken. (Ex, V1s came w/o warning, and the antenna’s affect is minimal anyways.). And the sheer cost of the HQ on average should offset the benefits of the extra TP.

I find the Quad fifty to be a better investment due to the new 222, and the faster you kill those, the better off you are. And the extra fifty cal bullets aren’t bad for opels/sdkfzs/bikes either.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Brutalized:

Actually, I think someone a while back mentioned that the passives on the HQ were broken. (Ex, V1s came w/o warning, and the antenna’s affect is minimal anyways.). And the sheer cost of the HQ on average should offset the benefits of the extra TP.

I find the Quad fifty to be a better investment due to the new 222, and the faster you kill those, the better off you are. And the extra fifty cal bullets aren’t bad for opels/sdkfzs/bikes either.

The fifty IS better until you lose the gunner, and that will ALWAYS happen at the worst possible time, murphy’s law says so.
I don’t mind giving up a bit of effectiveness in exchange for a little security.

 
Flag Post

I think they are both useless

 
Flag Post

You’re the useless one in this equation. If you think Sarge is better than both, watch as Urb’s randomness puts a bomb drop or an artillery strike on your Sarge and then watch as your men flee in terror.