FANDOM


  • Would anyone else like to see proper tanks? And I don't mean armoured cars like the GV-104 Razorback , I mean genuine large, tracked, heavily armed and armoured tanks. Specifically I would like to see:

    • Agency Battle Tank on the Black Market.
    • Enemy tanks at military bases.
    • Enemy tanks at the highest heat levels.
    • Enemy tanks guarding convoys of propaganda trucks (like mobile Propaganda Trailers) that you have to destroy for completion.
    • More missions, similar to Taming the Beast, which revolve around stealing tanks or armoured cars for the factions and such.

    Some of the tanks could be realistic and based off modern real-life tanks such as the M1 Abrams and T-90, while others might be more into the realms of science fiction.

    What do you think? Agree disagree, have similar ideas?

    Oh and this isn't on the JC3 wishlist because that's not really a discussion page, whereas a forum is for dicussion.

      Loading editor
    • I'd fancy something similiar to an M3 Lee. Or perhaps something in the likes of an artillery tank, so you can blow up bases from long range!

      Or maybe not, because that'd make it pretty easy to complete them.

        Loading editor
    • If they'll program them to look and work as well as the ones in Saints Row 3, sure. But if the tracks work like the ones on the Scando Track Loader Extreme, then I'd prefer them to sick to what they know and make the armoured vehicles like they are in JC(1), except that they should fix the vehicle balance glitch.

        Loading editor
    • Mauritsio wrote:
      ...something in the likes of an artillery tank, so you can blow up bases from long range...

      It'd have to be quite innacurate or it'd be overpowered.

        Loading editor
    • Tanks don't fit in with the JC thing.

        Loading editor
    • Yes they do. Ballard series in JC1. Razorback and Stonewall in JC2. All are borderline tanks, all they need are treads to qualify. They fit.

        Loading editor
    • Speeddaemon wrote: Tanks don't fit in with the JC thing.

      You haven't played JC(1), have you? Liberating a large settlement turns it into an epic wargame. Constant gunfire (not like in JC2 where at best only 2 guys have automatics) from like 10+ soldiers on both sides; you can't stand still for more than a couple of seconds with out being hit by a rocket; MVs with mounted guns; light armored vehicles on every street, used by both sides and using their turret weapons; heavy tank-looking armored vehicles on every other street; you can't Hijack an armored vehicle and drive it for more than 100m with out getting blown up by all the rocketlauncher and other armored vehicle gunfire that would consentrate on you. Think it's easier in the air? Think again! You have to play the game for like 100 hours to build up the helicopter skill to protect yourself from multiple helicopters at the same time, who use guided missiles against you and don't forget, you'd still have to have the time to help your ground troops against enemy Ballard series heavy armored vehcles. And when you reach level 5 Heat, it doesn't matter if you're on the ground or in the air, they'll send fighter jets after you, firing 2 guided missiles at once, but they usually manage to fire at least twice before they get out of range and have to circle around to aim again.

      JC2 was a major disapointntment, because they never use the planes against you.

      Slug gunner fan wrote: It'd have to be quite innacurate or it'd be overpowered.

      I wouldn't mind having a heavy multiple rocket launcher (example), as long as it's rare. Maybe it could be unlocked later in the storyline when there's a civil war and both sides are getting better equipment?

      And as I've explained better in thw JC3 wishlist, I'd like the enemy to be able to also conquer bases. Then we would end up making choices like lots of weak bases, or few strong ones, because we wouldn't have enough men for them all.

        Loading editor
    • That would make sense.

      How about a bonus unlockable "Kursk Mode" where the map is full of two armies of loads of AIs in tanks, armoured cars and such who are shooting each other to bits non-stop?

        Loading editor
    • Yeah it sounds like JC was nearly as good in graphics and better in gameplay from what you guys have said before as well and screenshots. But you did say it's even more repetitive than JC2 where at least you have variation in enviroment. But then it really depends with the setting the game is in and the context.

        Loading editor
    • Also I've noticed a remove button that comes over your messages as well? Is this disabled for regular users? It should be.

        Loading editor
    • It should indeed. Also don't double post, there's an edit button on your posts for a reason.

        Loading editor
    • Speeddaemon wrote: Yeah it sounds like JC was nearly as good in graphics and better in gameplay from what you guys have said before as well and screenshots. But you did say it's even more repetitive than JC2 where at least you have variation in enviroment. But then it really depends with the setting the game is in and the context.

      The same environment is more realistic. San Esperito is suppose to be somewhere south of Cuba. The graphics look better only from a distance and about as good in the jungles. The towns and villages are EXTREMELY generic. I believe the ground vehicle handling is better. Helicopters can't fly sideways (easy to get used to), but seem to be otherwise much better. The missions have much better dialogue and there's more storyline missions. The Grappler is more basic, so you can't climb trees and buldings with it.


      I doubt you'd regret buying it. If possible, you should get it with the box and disk, because that comes with the paper manual that has a bunch of interestng introduction text to get you in the mood. I've put some of that into articles, like Salvador Mendoza.




      Can you guys both see the remove button on other peoples posts?

        Loading editor
    • I reckon they should combine JC1 and 2 grappler physics in JC3 to be honest. Then you can do the paragliding thing again.

        Loading editor
    • Yes, over more, there is the remove button, if you make a test post I can try and remove it to see if I can or not. Also is it possible to remove this kudos thing? Points/karma/likes/votes always end badly.

        Loading editor
    • Speeddaemon
      Speeddaemon removed this reply because:
      Testing
      21:30, November 13, 2013
      This reply has been removed
    • If it's possible to remove the votes, I don't know how. User:Norrlanning96 might know.

        Loading editor
    • Ask my friend Pschycron from the Creative Universes wiki, he knows coding in and out.

        Loading editor
    • Yeah I deleted the test post. This needs to be fixed.

        Loading editor
    • I have no idea how modify the forum system, I don't even know if it actually is possible. But this needs to be fixed indeed.

        Loading editor
    • Back on topic... Norlanning, your opinion on tanks in JC3?

        Loading editor
    • I don't know what to say, really. The military shouldn't drive the tanks during free-roaming unless you heat-level is maxed out, but there could be missions where tanks are used by both the military and the agency/factions.

        Loading editor
    • I agree almost fully. I think that tanks should be in free-roam, but only on set patrol routes, guarding mobile destructables.

        Loading editor
    • Tanks would never be used for domestic patrol in reality, unless the enemy has conquered a part of the country. They take so much fuel and the tracks wear out and have to be replaced after every certain distance driven. That's why there are tank transporters (URGA-9380).

      I would keep them at some bases. They would only be used in some missions. And maybe I'd unlock some level of super-heat close to the end of the game. That would cause tanks and jets to come after you among the usual SUVs and things.

        Loading editor
    • That makes sense GMRE.

      Maybe the tanks are only on domestic patrol before the last mission when everything's going pear-shaped for the government and they want to sort it out reeeal bad...

      Do you like the idea of mobile destructables on set patrol routes though?

        Loading editor
    • I wouldn't want them to be on set routs. It would be nice to see them at random places. I described something similar at the JC3 wishlist.

        Loading editor
    • Cool. Blowing up tanker trucks for chaos points seems good, but I'm dissapointed that you think Rico wouldn't drive one. The guy uses a grappling hook that leaves him completely exposed while hurtling through the air at suidicdal velocties for god's sake! Isn't that thing a death trap already? besides they would be a great ramming tool because a tanker truck would explode with some serious bang compared to other vehicles...

      As well as the tanker, how about a propaganda truck? It plays the same kind of stuff that Propaganda Trailers do, but if Rico hijacks one it starts playing his favourite heavy metal anthems while he drives around running over hapless soldiers...

      (Sees Rico and the gang running around with HEAVY MACHINE GUNS ((look up Metal Slug to understand the reference)), killing people and headbanging while "Primo Victoria" plays in the background)

        Loading editor
    • He thinks it's dangerous, because it would be like taking cover on top of a fuel depot, while having a shootout with the military. Would you do that?

      Maybe. But the game developers would have to pay for the copyrights to use that music in their game.

        Loading editor
    • Like I said: he uses the grappling hook, the risk with THAT thing pales in comparison to driving a mobile bomb. Who cares? They should pay the cost if it means epic metal music!

        Loading editor
    • About the removal of posts.

      I found that while looking at the thread in the "history" (through the "more" button), I could restore a removed post.

        Loading editor
    • Well at least a way to fix trolling/abuse but not prevent it. As for the music, it's a tricky matter, game music needs to appeal to everyone and certainly not everyone likes metal music. It needs to be somehting more universal and cinematic. Music is a key point in any videos/games or the like, I would say it is more important than plots and graphics tbh.

        Loading editor
    • I always turn it off in the game settings, if any of my games turns out to have some music that it plays over freeroam gameplay.

        Loading editor
    • Speeddaemon wrote:
      ...not everyone likes metal music...

      What's the world coming to?

        Loading editor
    • Tanks would be awesome in Just Cause 3, they should have an agency version, then maybe 2 enemy verisions (light and heavy). I also reckon a vehicle like the AC130 would be awesome to have, maybe coming in at the last heat level and blasts the area your at with miniguns and artillery, they could also be boarded and and used to bomb the hell out of enemy bases (though they would be very susecptable to enemy fire), it could also drop down enemy paratroopers and maybe even light vehicles such as armoured cars. I reckon the heat levels should go like this:

      Heat 1: Weak milita with crappy weapons coming in on un armed jeeps and bikes

      Heat 2: Soldiers equipped with military level gear with machine gun jeeps, trucks and bikes.

      Heat 3: Light air support in the form of scout helicopters ontop of more soldiers with the previously said gear.

      Heat 4: Elite Soldiers armed with the best gear and training attack from the ground with heavily armoured and armed jeeps (grenade launcher turrets for cars would be sweet), more helicopters.

      Heat 5: Heavy air support with gunships and transport helis deployng elite soldiers onto the field. Armoured cars and gun trucks would also assualt you.

      Heat 6: Tanks, Jet fighters, AC130 Gunship, elite soldiers dropped down as paratroopers aswell as coming in from the ground in trucks and such.

        Loading editor
    • I'm sure JC2 and even JC1 would have featured tanks if Avalanche had gotten around to implementing a tread system. Explains why the bulldozer in the first game didn't have treads even though it obviously should have, and in JC2's case the Razorback and some other vehicles with mounted cannons; it's just easier to model a vehicle slightly differently from an actual tank with the same basic tank functionality using the game's standard wheel system. However the game admits that the Razorback is just an "armored car" at one point, so I'd hope that in JC3 Avalanche would go through the trouble to make a vehicle that would fit well in the JC IP.

        Loading editor
    • There's actually plenty of heavy armored cars out there that look like the Ballard series armoured vehicles. Some examples: 1, 2, 3, 4.

      Tanks aren't really useful as infantry fighting vehicles. That's the only role the games ever use them at. Even the SV-1007 Stonewall would be good, if they would actually show up at heat and use the turret. Trouble is that the SV-series armoured vehicles handle like shit and they don't look good either.

      I don't know what they were thinking when they designed the GV-104 Razorback. There's nothing like that in reality and the wheels are much too small.

        Loading editor
    • OrkMarine wrote:
      Tanks would be awesome in Just Cause 3, they should have an agency version, then maybe 2 enemy verisions (light and heavy). I also reckon a vehicle like the AC130 would be awesome to have, maybe coming in at the last heat level and blasts the area your at with miniguns and artillery, they could also be boarded and and used to bomb the hell out of enemy bases (though they would be very susecptable to enemy fire), it could also drop down enemy paratroopers and maybe even light vehicles such as armoured cars. I reckon the heat levels should go like this:

      Heat 1: Weak milita with crappy weapons coming in on un armed jeeps and bikes

      Heat 2: Soldiers equipped with military level gear with machine gun jeeps, trucks and bikes.

      Heat 3: Light air support in the form of scout helicopters ontop of more soldiers with the previously said gear.

      Heat 4: Elite Soldiers armed with the best gear and training attack from the ground with heavily armoured and armed jeeps (grenade launcher turrets for cars would be sweet), more helicopters.

      Heat 5: Heavy air support with gunships and transport helis deployng elite soldiers onto the field. Armoured cars and gun trucks would also assualt you.

      Heat 6: Tanks, Jet fighters, AC130 Gunship, elite soldiers dropped down as paratroopers aswell as coming in from the ground in trucks and such.

      I approve :D

        Loading editor
    • Even the SV-1007 Stonewall would be good, if they would actually shoe up at heat and use the turret.

      The AI drivers aren't capable of using the turrets anyways, sadly. The only time they use guns on vehicles is when they are manning the mounted guns. In my Crazy Civilian AI Mod I have tried to get the AI to use the turrets on some of the armored cars, but the AI code simply isn't there.

      Also, in JC2-MP when someone fires from the kind of turret mounted on the armored cars and APCs it looks odd because this kind of bullet/tracer was only meant to be seen from the player's perspective behind the wheel of an armored car.

        Loading editor
    • In the San Esperito Military uses turret weapons all the time. Game developers must have just decided that it would make JC2 too difficult for noobs.

      What does it look like?


      So you can make mods?

      • Could you make the Minigun turret bulletproof? And then stick a Flak Cannon into it, instead of the minigun?
      • Could you stick a 4-barrel flak cannon onto the turretless GV-104 Razorback?
        Loading editor
    • I have never made a vehicle mod before, only AI mods. Sorry. :(

      When I get my PC fixed I will be sure to learn how, and may be able to make these mods, if I can find time.

      The San Esperito Military uses them all the time because it is obvious that Avalanche invested more time in the AI system in JC1 than the one in JC2. The first game uses Avalanche's own AI engine built into Avalanche Engine 1.0, but it didn't fit their needs for JC2 so they decided to buy the Path Engine and use that for the AI of the second game. It is an x and y (good for ground/sea) engine, meaning that it can't handle x, y, and z (good for ground/sea and air) very well. This explains why the airplane AI in the second game was disturbingly primitive compared to that of the first game. However, heli AI in JC2 was some of the best I have seen in any game.

        Loading editor
    • Lol what? Heli AI was good? I don't really think so, multiple crashes due to their programming. The combat AI is kinda good though.

        Loading editor
    • I could try to make tank mod for JC2. But it will take time and the controls will stay the same. I will use the Razorback and put things like treads on it.

        Loading editor
    • Cool. :D

      You should also make it a lot bigger, if that's possible. An actual tank is suppose to be bigger than the SV-1007 Stonewall. I already have mods that do things to that, so don't change either of the SVs.

      And if possible, could you add one of the single barrel Flak Cannon into the turret? And could you also make the turret wider to resemble the turret of a real tank? And make it stronger. I have a mod that makes the SV-1007 Stonewall more powerful and gives it much better armor.

      I don't know if any of that is actually possible (or how much effort it would take), but I'd like it to look as realistic as possible.

      Don't add like 10 miniguns and 6 SAM launchers to it. That would look lame. Only add the 1 Flak Cannon. It would be nice, if you could disable the default Auto cannon.

        Loading editor
    • I like your idea GMRE. Why do people even bother downloading things like helicopters with 10 to 20+ miniguns? 

        Loading editor
    • Sorry, I forgot to log in.

        Loading editor
    • Some people like it because they're too bad at games to play otherwise :P.

        Loading editor
    • I would like to see tanks, with a powerful shot but a long reload time and enemies can maybe jack you if you're not moving or something. Maybe also add a muesum where you can find WWII tanks or something.

        Loading editor
    • The real world tank reload time is about 5 seconds. But if the tank doesn't have an automatic reloading system and has only one crewman, you couldn't shoot while moving and it could take you like a minute to climb from one seat to another with out leaving the tank. Also, real tanks can't be hijacked, so I wouldn't want that.

        Loading editor
    • GMRE wrote:
      ...real tanks can't be hijacked...

      They have roof hatches. That's nough for Rico to get inside and kill the crew. Simple as.

        Loading editor
    • Yeah but the crew may shoot Rico while he is getting in

        Loading editor
    • You're expecting tank crewmen to have guns on them inside a cramped space with almost no room for them to aim.

        Loading editor
    • Well how is Rico going get the military out if it is so cramped

        Loading editor
    • Only badly designed tanks are "cramped". Good ones even have seats that can be leaned back to let the crew sleep in the tank. Plus, the more space there is in the tank, the more future-proof the tank is. That's because new equipment needs space too. For example, the american Abrams tanks are from like the 1970's, but their modifications are still in use thanks to there being enough room for additional new equipment. Examples of cramped tanks are soviet/russian tanks where all new equipment has to be mounted to the outside of the tanks body.

      And yes, real tank crewmen obviously carry weapons. That's to have a means of self defense when they go outside to load supplies, or pee. During WW2 the germans even produced assault rifles with a curved barrel to let tank crews shoot at close enemy solders who might be trying to sneak up on the tank. Using a usual gun would have meant being exposed like the Panau Military.

      But when have the laws of physics (or common sense for that matter) ever stopped Rico? Can any of you remember/know how easily he can hijack Ballard series armored vehicles?

        Loading editor
    • 188.29.81.66 wrote:
      Well how is Rico going get the military out if it is so cramped

      He isn't. He's gonna kill 'em, get 'em out of the seats and leave 'em. It'll smell after a while but that's about it.

      GMRE wrote:
      But when have the laws of physics (or common sense for that matter) ever stopped Rico?

      Admin has a point.

        Loading editor
    • Well your the wine who said it was cramped I new it was not cramped because I have been in a tank at a show

        Loading editor
    • The military would shoot a bullet up Rico's ass

        Loading editor
    • I am the same person as 188

        Loading editor
    • Why are we arguing about this just cause 3 will be a video game it would take a lot of work to get all the stuff that we have said into it e.g asullt rifles in the tank I doub half the stuff will be in the game

        Loading editor
    • I don't know. What's the point of anything? We just like tanks and we'd like them to be in JC3. This is kind of like a tank oriented wish-list.

        Loading editor
    • WE want tanks in just cause 3 GMRE please make a thred  called you make up the name and tell me here because this tread has to mutch stuff  on it can you make so only me and you can edit it because I dont want other people messing it up please do that.

        Loading editor
    • It's impossible to have a private chat room, or thread at a wiki. If you want there to be an additional thread for something, it can be made here, but I can't make it private.

        Loading editor
    • Screw tanks,  Just cause 3 needs one of these: Company_of_Heroes_2_Artwork_04.jpg

        Loading editor
    • Those are awesome weapons, but it has too much range. Sure you could destroy a whole base, if you aim it well, but if you're too far to see it, what's the point? With a tank, you need a line of sight to the target, so you'll always see it all.

        Loading editor
    • Listen we want tanks not cars or trucks with weapons TANKS we don't want a military car or truck with 76 rockets on the back something realistic like a normal tank escorted by trucks with soldiers on the back a battle field like you held a faction win a war every time the military gets better like the road you should see trucks with soldiers on the back

        Loading editor
    • I think that it's stupid enemies can destroy ur tank with a pistol and sub-machine guns. A tank couldn't be destroyed like that in real life.

        Loading editor
    • Tanks would be great. They should have a cannon along with multiple guns and they should have tracks not tires.

        Loading editor
    • Do you have a thread about helicopters?

        Loading editor
    • Special:Forum Do you see one? Feel free to make one.

        Loading editor
    • Hey everybody! Look at this picture and zoom in on the street below Rico. Notice anything? It's not a tank, it looks more like a Ballard M5B1 Scout, but I'll take it. Let's hope the vehicle handling is better. It should be, considering they hired more developers specifically to improve handling.

        Loading editor
    • I see 'em.

        Loading editor
    • GMRE
      GMRE removed this reply because:
      Irrelevant spam.
      17:06, January 13, 2015
      This reply has been removed
    • Tanks with tread would be cool, but also keep the old tanks

        Loading editor
    • I strongly disagree. Having wheeled IFVs filling the role of tanks has become an iconic Just Cause game series feature. The minute you put in a military vehicle with treads, it stops being a Just Cause game.

      At least to me, I'm sure nobody else would care.

        Loading editor
    • Does JC3 have any bulldozers or 'cherry picker' vehicles? What about warships or yachts?

        Loading editor
    • @SniperKing1 See Category:Just Cause 3 Vehicles for a full list of vehicles, sorted by type.

        Loading editor
    • Imagine if a game company gave you gameplay options to settle debates like this.

      For example in this, you could turn the "Tanks" setting on or off. When it's on, treaded vehicles spawn and appear, in addition to the traditional IFV-style vehicles. When it's turned off, it stops the tanks from spawning but increases the spawn rate of the IFVs.

      That would settle it. I still want there to be no tanks though.

        Loading editor
    • Same, I actually prefer APC's to tanks.

        Loading editor
    • I'd like a game that has them both, but they should function differently, like they do in real life. Right now the JC3 8-wheelers handle like very heavy (or just underpowered) tanks. In JC1 they handled they way you'd expect an 8-wheeled armored vehicle to handle. And it's not just the handling. Vehicles of different size and type have different roles on a realistic battlefield and if used improperly, they become extremely inefficient. Take for example the Urga Bkolos 2100. It's a light armored vehicle, but what weapon does it have? Only a gun. Why? A vehicle like that should definitely have a machine gun, or two. At the same time, look at the CS Odjur. Why is it able to fight infantry so easily? Realistically it's really difficult to fight infantry with only a coaxial MG. That vehicle should be nearly defenseless when it's swarmed by infantry. But at the same time, it should have an aiming scope for the gun and it should be able to blow up an Urga Bkolos 2100 from a great distance in a single hit.

      Now if you'd add proper tanks to that, then the difference between the wheeled vehicles and real tanks would be that wheeled vehicles have light armor in order to be as mobile as possible. A CS Odjur would have the same weapon advantages and disadvantages as proper tanks, but a proper tank would be nearly invincible thanks to heavy armor. And by "invincible" I mean that only FOWs, other tanks, the CS Odjur and attack helicopters could destroy it. A real tank would destroy a CS Odjur type vehicle as easily as a CS Odjur could destroy an Urga Bkolos 2100. The armor, armament and handling of vehicles like that are orders of magnitude away from each other. They all have a specific role on the battlefield. Just because on paper it may look like the Urga Bkolos 2100 can take on a tank in some very rare once in a million scenario doesn't mean it's actually doable.

      Reality: Normal car < Urga Szturm 63A < Urga Bkolos 2100 < CS Odjur < Tank < CS Navajo.

      The main thing to complain about is that armored vehicles in games usually have very poor armor. Game developers don't want to make some vehicles and weapons realisctically powerful, because that would be unfair and unbalanced, but guess what? Life is not fair. The best shoulder-fired rocket-launchers do nothing to any post 1950s tanks, but games have to be balanced to be fun for everybody, so we end up with IFVs that have no MG and hand grenades that blow up heavy armored vehicles.

      Now as far as tracks are concerned, it makes sense that some developers don't want to make tank tracks as realistic as they are in Saints Row 3, because that's an immense amount of time and effort for a very limited few vehicles. I don't mind that, but as stated above, I'd like armored vehicles to have realistic flaws and advantages.

      I could go on with this lecture for hours considering the number of books and stuff I've read about the history of weapons and warfare (particularly armored ones).

        Loading editor
    • I don't have JC3, but a civilian (no armament) delta-wing jet that can alternate between 'plane' and VTOL mode would be awesome.

        Loading editor
    • Um...

      I don't think that would be legal in the real world

      The US Military operates the V-22 Osprey and the British have their Harrier Jump Jets

      But I don't think any civilian could own an ex-military vehicle in the real world

      Not saying I'm true

        Loading editor
    • SniperKing1 wrote:
      I don't have JC3, but a civilian (no armament) delta-wing jet that can alternate between 'plane' and VTOL mode would be awesome.

      It could just be a recreational aircraft.


        Loading editor
    • GMRE wrote:
      I'd like a game that has them both, but they should function differently, like they do in real life. Right now the JC3 8-wheelers handle like very heavy (or just underpowered) tanks. In JC1 they handled they way you'd expect an 8-wheeled armored vehicle to handle. And it's not just the handling. Vehicles of different size and type have different roles on a realistic battlefield and if used improperly, they become extremely inefficient. Take for example the Urga Bkolos 2100. It's a light armored vehicle, but what weapon does it have? Only a gun. Why? A vehicle like that should definitely have a machine gun, or two. At the same time, look at the CS Odjur. Why is it able to fight infantry so easily? Realistically it's really difficult to fight infantry with only a coaxial MG. That vehicle should be nearly defenseless when it's swarmed by infantry. But at the same time, it should have an aiming scope for the gun and it should be able to blow up an Urga Bkolos 2100 from a great distance in a single hit.

      Now if you'd add proper tanks to that, then the difference between the wheeled vehicles and real tanks would be that wheeled vehicles have light armor in order to be as mobile as possible. A CS Odjur would have the same weapon advantages and disadvantages as proper tanks, but a proper tank would be nearly invincible thanks to heavy armor. And by "invincible" I mean that only FOWs, other tanks, the CS Odjur and attack helicopters could destroy it. A real tank would destroy a CS Odjur type vehicle as easily as a CS Odjur could destroy an Urga Bkolos 2100. The armor, armament and handling of vehicles like that are orders of magnitude away from each other. They all have a specific role on the battlefield. Just because on paper it may look like the Urga Bkolos 2100 can take on a tank in some very rare once in a million scenario doesn't mean it's actually doable.

      Reality: Normal car < Urga Szturm 63A < Urga Bkolos 2100 < CS Odjur < Tank < CS Navajo.

      The main thing to complain about is that armored vehicles in games usually have very poor armor. Game developers don't want to make some vehicles and weapons realisctically powerful, because that would be unfair and unbalanced, but guess what? Life is not fair. The best shoulder-fired rocket-launchers do nothing to any post 1950s tanks, but games have to be balanced to be fun for everybody, so we end up with IFVs that have no MG and hand grenades that blow up heavy armored vehicles.

      Now as far as tracks are concerned, it makes sense that some developers don't want to make tank tracks as realistic as they are in Saints Row 3, because that's an immense amount of time and effort for a very limited few vehicles. I don't mind that, but as stated above, I'd like armored vehicles to have realistic flaws and advantages.

      I could go on with this lecture for hours considering the number of books and stuff I've read about the history of weapons and warfare (particularly armored ones).

      Some good points, but where does the imperiator bavarium tank fit in with all of this.

        Loading editor
    • The IBT is a unique tank which would fit in everywhere

      It is the most powerful tank in the Medician Military

      It's 8-wheeled drive makes it comparable to the CS Odjur

      And the shield would give it a unique advantage over any tank in the world: Invincibility... save for EMPs

        Loading editor
    • Wingsuiter wrote:
      GMRE wrote:
      I'd like a game that has them both, but they should function differently, like they do in real life. Right now the JC3 8-wheelers handle like very heavy (or just underpowered) tanks. In JC1 they handled they way you'd expect an 8-wheeled armored vehicle to handle.
      Some good points, but where does the imperiator bavarium tank fit in with all of this.

      You didn't have to put in that whole comment.

        Loading editor
    • Anonymous230385 wrote:
      Um...

      I don't think that would be legal in the real world

      The US Military operates the V-22 Osprey and the British have their Harrier Jump Jets

      But I don't think any civilian could own an ex-military vehicle in the real world

      Not saying I'm true

      1. You're applying real-world logic to what is not just a video game, but an 80s action movie in video game form. This rarely works.

      2. There's no need for it to be ex-military. The fact that civilian helicopters exist indicates that the market for non-military VTOL aircraft is there.

      Anonymous230385 wrote:

      And the shield would give it a unique advantage over any tank in the world: Invincibility... save for EMPs

      Sorry, but this kind of irked me. What we have here is a no-limits fallacy. Just because the shield shrugs off everything we see thrown at it in-game does not mean it is totally invincible, a stronger weapon than those employed in the games could very well be able to breach it.

        Loading editor
    • I guess the Imperator Bavarium Tank would be about as good as some type of normal tank. Not all tanks are the same. Some older ones that are still used are really crappy and other are much better.

      Also, military equipment ownership laws are different in different nations. There's a lot of tanks and artillery in private collections, even with working guns. The important thing to note is that all those are legally defined as "antique", so they're all museum exhibits. I'm pretty sure there's also a few jet fighter planes in private ownership, but all their weapons are removed and the laws are quite strict about letting people take pictures of engine components, because fighter engines are definitely still "strategic components". The reason is that unlike any cars (which are all made to last only up to 5 years), weapons are all built to last. And they do last for many decades, so many nations still use 1970s fighters and tanks. That's why fighters and tanks in private collections are legally in a very grey area.

        Loading editor
    • Yep

        Loading editor
    • Well the no limits fallacy is kinda justified, seeing as how the thing is undamaged by th he bavarium "nukes"

        Loading editor
    • Wingsuiter wrote:
      Well the no limits fallacy is kinda justified, seeing as how the thing is undamaged by th he bavarium "nukes"

      No, it isn't. Logical fallacies are bad debating, pure and simple.

      And the Bavarium nukes are comparable to a few tons of TNT at best, if my admittedly rough and uneducated judgement of the size of the explosion is correct (for reference, this is what half a kiloton looks like). And the tank's shields would only be absorbing a small part of the energy because the blast is omnidirectional rather than focused.

      So the best resillience we've seen from these shields is the equivalent of, what, some tens or hundreds of kilos of TNT? From a realistic perspective that's a lot... until you consider that the shields can only be turned on for a few seconds at a time.

        Loading editor
    • GMRE wrote: -Snipped lecture on tanks and wheeled AFVs-

      First of all the points about balancing is 100% true. In Just Cause 3 you can make one CS Odjur last for a long, long time, and use it to destroy pretty much an army worth of enemy forces. Realistically of course you wouldn't be able to make it last very long, but what fun is that to have a tank that doesn't last more than five seconds?

      A good example of this is the secret vehicle health mechanic in video games. Vehicles are made of paper but when you get in a vehicle, its damage resistance morphs to steel. A vehicle being driven by the player takes more damage before exploding than the same vehicle being driven by an NPC.

      What if you remove that mechanic for realism, and even account the power of each weapon?

      Mercenaries 2: World in Flames.

      This game has light tanks, and main battle tanks. Using a light tank against a main battle tank is less efficient than using a main battle tank yourself. You only take about three or four shells at full health before exploding, regardless of your tank type it seems, but so does the enemy. It's like multiplayer with bots where everyone has the same health, but it destroys the ability to make a tank take an army down with it, or to have a prolonged episode of fun before it gets destroyed.

      Bottom line, there is a game out there that has realisticish tank armor and damage, and it's far from fun to use tanks in. (There's actually a mission where you have to defend a building from tanks, and I probably burned through ten of them having to re-hijack another each time. Nobody told me that the vehicle-health-buff mechanic wasn't there and I had to figure it out myself.) Additionally, hijacking a tank that actually is at full health is pretty rare.

        Loading editor
    • Slug gunner fan wrote:
      -snipped colossal response to my personal logic-

      -({[A230385.exe has crashed indefinitely due to titanic response]})-

      In the modern world, tanks are utililzed for almost everything

      Amphibious, artillery, main battle tanks (such as Type 99, M1 Abrams, Leopard A2)

      Even ISIS/L has its own self-propelled artillery (though it's highly unlikely they'll be able to utilize that kind of tech unless a tank operator defects)



      Frankly, I don't know what's the difference between utilizing real-world logic to video game physics and comparisons between game vehicles and their real0world counterparts

      The CS Comet could be based on the Silosky UH-60 Black Hawk while the HH-22 Savior is obviously based on that

      The Jackson Z-19 Skreemer and the CS Navajo are based on the Boeing AH-64 Apache (though the Navajo can indeed resemble other helicopters)

      IDK now

        Loading editor
    • ISIS even has some Abrams tanks that they captured from Iraq.


      It's actually good that game armored vehicles have so few effective range, especially when used by AI. Otherwise, they could consentrate accurate fire on the player from like 2 kilometers away. That wouldn't be fun anymore.

        Loading editor
    • Yeah I know that


      Actually GMRE I remember at some quarries like Cava Montana I was liberating it and then these explosions appear next to me and I look from where they are and it seems like there is a artillery post on a train

        Loading editor
    • Yeesh. What did I do?

        Loading editor
    • You? Nothing

      The giant response that followed? Couldn't read

        Loading editor
    • Anonymous230385 wrote: Yeah I know that


      Actually GMRE I remember at some quarries like Cava Montana I was liberating it and then these explosions appear next to me and I look from where they are and it seems like there is a artillery post on a train

      Don't even get us all started on those. Luckily tanks can take a beating from that but it's just so accurate if you're not moving...

      AND THE MISSILES FOLLOW YOU I STILL HAVE NIGHTMARES

        Loading editor
    • I got at least 2 of my tanks blown up by those.

        Loading editor
    • Those are frightening

        Loading editor
    • Scared the scrap out of me once

        Loading editor
    • Well that's the intended effect

      Scare the player into seeing their impending death

        Loading editor
    • Wingsuiter wrote: Scared the scrap out of me once

      That sounds like something a Red Faction: Guerrilla player would say.

        Loading editor
    • Heh

        Loading editor
    • Porto Conceal scared the scrap out of me one second I'm pressing the button to open the generators next thing I know 2 CS Odjurs show up along with 4 imperatator barvarium tanks and blew me to pieces is that a game error?

        Loading editor
    • Concela

        Loading editor
    • I've never seen more than 1 Imperator Bavarium Tank. Normally it's only driven by the base commander.

        Loading editor
    • Honestly GMRE that happened

        Loading editor
    • Glitches can happen, that's not unbelievable. I actually wish this happened more often. It would make tanks more useful and would give the shield more strategic value.

        Loading editor
    • Re oppress it and try it yourself (assuming you've completed it)

        Loading editor
    • Porto Coclea for me spawns two Imperator Bavarium Tanks as reinforcements, and the Base commander spawns in a CS Powerrun 77.

      Varied results base on game copy?

        Loading editor
    • I think the game itself is very varied. We just don't know all the variables.

        Loading editor
    • ^

        Loading editor
    • Anyway, about the original topic,

      I vote no to treaded vehicles.

        Loading editor
    • maybe in a future dlc

        Loading editor
    • I vote no

        Loading editor
    • I say thee nay

        Loading editor
    • 188.29.95.65 wrote:
      Porto Conceal scared the scrap out of me one second I'm pressing the button to open the generators next thing I know 2 CS Odjurs show up along with 4 imperatator barvarium tanks and blew me to pieces is that a game error?


      "Porto Conceal"?

      Self-reactivated 221 days later

        Loading editor
    • "Reactivated 54 days later"

        Loading editor
    • wat

        Loading editor
    • Are you guys all talking about JC 1 or 2 or 3 or the upcoming 4?

      If it's 3, I would like to see tanks with treads and maybe you can allow rebels in to operate your secondary weapon.

        Loading editor
    • Reactivated 384 days later

      Upcoming 4 (possibly)

      JC3 has already been released

        Loading editor
    • Of course! It's the only Just Cause game I play. 

        Loading editor
    • You asked which one

        Loading editor
    • Treads wouldn't be bad, I just hope they'd be done well, otherwise I'd be disapointed they ignored tradition for something poorly done.

        Loading editor
    • *disappointed

        Loading editor
    • Your wishes have been answered.

      Treaded Tank Front Dark
      Treaded Tank Possibly Damaged
        Loading editor
    • Reactivated 164 days later

        Loading editor
    • What ya disappointed for? The tanks finally got tracks now

        Loading editor
    • Also note that the powered sprocket is at the front, indicating that the tanks gearbox is at the front. Until 1940 most of the worlds tanks had that layout and until 1945 about a half of the worlds tanks were like that, but since then almost all tanks have had the gearbox at the rear.

        Loading editor
    • I'm not disappointed

      I'm just saying what I always say

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message