|
|
Battlemaster (tank general)
|
17
|
|
|
|
Battlemaster (nuke general)
|
27
|
|
|
|
Scorpion (toxin general)
|
13
|
|
|
|
Crusader
|
7
|
|
|
|
Crusader (laser general)
|
15
|
|
|
Guests can't vote. Try login or register.
|
 ColonelJoined: 11/9/2005(UTC)
Posts: 182
Location: United Kingdom
|
here are the best versions of each of the main battle tanks, which ones your favourite? they are in no particular order. the toxin generals scorpion is there because they come with toxin shells that can be upgraded to anthrax gamma. EDIT: remember that upgrades should also be counted in your opinion but when you get them should also count. for example, autoloaders are useless for rushes, so that counts against the tank generals battlemaster. Edited by user Friday, May 26, 2006 1:08:45 AM(UTC)
| Reason: Not specified |
<div style="text-align: center;">  |
|
|
|
|
|
 PrivateJoined: 5/22/2006(UTC)
Posts: 28
Location: USA
|
Battlemasters are the weakest tanks in the game. Scoprion tanks are good aganist tanks and bulidings.
Crusader tanks are pretty good,too. |
With Auroras, you do not need a SW- EOG
|
|
|
|
|
|
Colonel Joined: 11/9/2005(UTC)
Posts: 182
Location: United Kingdom
|
lol, battlemasters the weakest tanks in the game?
battlemasters do the same damage as the paladin and crusader, with uranium shells they do the most damage and with autoloaders they do double the damage.
the scorpion has the least armor.
so what are you reffering to when you call them the weakest? |
<div style="text-align: center;"> |
|
|
|
|
|
 Commander in ChiefJoined: 4/15/2004(UTC)
Posts: 2,200
Location: Gensokyo
Was thanked: 11 time(s) in 10 post(s)
|
Umm... They do? I always thought the Crusader did the most out of the three when un-upgraded... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 GeneralJoined: 4/25/2003(UTC)
Posts: 1,822
Location: Netherlands
|
i thought so too. if i'm not mistaken the battlemaster is alot weaker then the crusader in terms of firepower. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Colonel Joined: 11/9/2005(UTC)
Posts: 182
Location: United Kingdom
|
the battlemaster, crusader and paladin all do 60 damage, with uranium shells the battlemaster does 75 damage and with autoloaders the battlemaster does 120 damage. with both upgrades the battlemaster does 150 damage. the reason that it seems to do less damage is the health difference. Paladin 500 health (600 with composite armor) Crusader 480 health (580 with composite armor) Battlemaster 400 health Edited by user Wednesday, May 31, 2006 9:35:17 AM(UTC)
| Reason: Not specified |
<div style="text-align: center;"> |
|
|
|
|
|
Commander in Chief Joined: 5/17/2003(UTC)
Posts: 1,602
Location: Sweden
|
And how much health does the Scorpion tank have?
400 seems to be very little though...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Private Joined: 5/29/2006(UTC)
Posts: 24
Location: USA
|
TheGimp wrote:
Battlemaster (nuke general) With no upgrades..Drive one into the other team ^.^bang and there dead/damaged :P so others can clean them up..
Just send them in when in the red :)
Uh I know this is an old post and many people have probobly already said what I'm about to but, using the Nuke BM for suicide is like buying an airplane ticket to get the peanuts. 1 Toxin terrorist on a combat bike would do just about the same damage, and leave the DOT field, and is more cost effective. Besides that I believe I voted for(yea i forgot already @_@) the tank gen's BM, with the autoloader upgrade which can be accessed fairly early, one battlemaster may as well be 3, and the three you probobly already built may as well be 9, minus the hastle that comes with hordes, what I mean is firing lines, with a big group yea, you can replace all the units but not all can fire. And yea its true that theres drawbacks to the autoloader, being that for every one BM destroyed you lose a significant portion of a small force but when the three go down I'll bet money they've already inflicted a good deal of damage. Edited by user Wednesday, May 31, 2006 3:37:53 PM(UTC)
| Reason: Not specified |
Dr. Thrax will see you now... |
|
|
|
|
|
Colonel Joined: 11/9/2005(UTC)
Posts: 182
Location: United Kingdom
|
EA weakened the shells of the battlemaster with autoloaders for balance, the three shells do the damage of two (that's all together, not each shell) Incia wrote:
And how much health does the Scorpion tank have?
400 seems to be very little though...
370 Edited by user Thursday, June 1, 2006 12:44:54 AM(UTC)
| Reason: Not specified |
<div style="text-align: center;"> |
|
|
|
|
|
Private Joined: 5/29/2006(UTC)
Posts: 24
Location: USA
|
Flip1299 wrote:EA weakened the shells of the battlemaster with autoloaders for balance, the three shells do the damage of two (that's all together, not each shell) Incia wrote:
And how much health does the Scorpion tank have?
400 seems to be very little though...
370 What they should have done with the autoloaders is given them a good rate of fire, and not 3 shell-bursts. It would be alot more realistic that way. Then again, if generals was realistic, nuke radiation would last the entire game, depleted uranium would NOT leave a radiation field(depleted...de..ple...ted... uranium) nukes would take out most of the map, tactical nukes would be what normal ones are now, nuke cannons would be on the US side(atomic annie all the way! =^^=) poison wouldn't spread in clouds on the ground, airplanes would dodge using the pilot's skill at missile evading and not ECM's and the GLA would be so overpowered and outclassed they wouldn't know what to do <_<'. But, generals isn't real thank god, though world leaders should use it to resolve conflicts XP... Oh, and if the shells are upgraded with the 'depleted' uraniumness, do they gain their orig. power?(For the BM+Autoloader) |
Dr. Thrax will see you now... |
|
|
|
|
|
| Users browsing this topic |
|
Guest
|
Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.
