Oh please not, we had this in FH2.0 and it was a pain, you never knew when the wreck your hiding behind was going to kill you...

tl;dr? I mentioned this as something I would not like to be changed. Specifically:

• Tank becoming wreck >> Splash could be increased
• Wreck becoming nothing >> Splash should not be increased

I spent a lot of time using tanks in FH2, and I have found an annoyance that would be great to solve. It goes like this: you take a shot at an enemy tank, severely damaging (but not killing it) and the tanker becomes aware of you. He does whatever he can to turn the tables but, if he knows you outsmarted him, he bails just as you make his tank explode, saving his life by appearing as infantry over an exploding wreck.

Experienced enemies can time more or less the ammount of time it would take you to load the next shot and fire it. Thus, they try to exit the tank a bit before you shot in order to maximize their possibilities to hit you while saving their own lives. I have seen this the most in maps like Op. Aberdeen, where allies have the Valentine that can't be oneshot under normal circumstances even from behind, but the same has happened to me on some Normandy map against some German behemot, robbing me of a well deserved kill against a superior opponent. Sometimes you don't even have a MG on your vehicle available to kill off the bailing tanker, so you just feel cheated.

So, I suggest any (or all) of the following alternatives:

1- A meaningful delay on exiting a tank.
2- Exploding tanks creating more splash damage around them.
3- Flames over the wreck of a tank causing instakill.

The first one I just don't know as I haven't ever seen anything like a delay for entering or exiting vehicles on BF2.
The second one I realize it might be a trade-off. I suppose that splash damage on exploding wrecks was lessened in order to avoid the "staying close to a flaming wreck that randomly decides to explode death" effect, and I dunno if you can change the ammount of splash damage a tank makes when becoming a wreck, while leaving alone the damage a wreck does when becoming nothing. But, if it isn't possible, maybe increasing the splash a little bit wouldn't hurt.
And the third one, I couldn't possibly know if the wrecks could carry a "damaging fire" parameter attached to them.

Of all the choices, only the first one will discourage bailing the tank while preserving the possibility to attain full score for the guy with the upper hand (as he will kill a tank, not an infantry). But all of them have a factor of discouragement of the "insta-bail" reflex that will eventually make it dissappear.

The idea is sound if the trench binoculars are implemented as a static. Not so much if the kit is a deployable one, because the artillerymen using them will:

• Not be able to use a deployable mortar + deployable binocs at the same time
  
• Have to redeploy trench binocs every time he tries a target on a not-deployable artillery emplacement

The other deployable kits make sense because people stay using them for a while. If there are deployable binocs that you deploy, use, and immediately get out (because it has no offensive capabilities whatsoever and players want to frag) then their constant appearance and disappearance shaves a bunch of realism to the game. Plus, using normal binocs would be faster most of the time, no matter what advantage you give to the trench binocs.

But, if they're placed as a static at some strategic points on some maps, like on the hill's trench system at the southwest flag on Port en Bessin 64... Realism + usefullness = Win

I think the FHGNs are a good reason to flex the FH2 muscles for everyone (including myself) that is kind of a seasonal FH2 player, when it's off-season (meaning, the latest patch has lost its novelty and numbers dwindle). Other servers may hold their own events but only the FHGN has that "official" aftertaste that attracts people far and wide (I'm from Argentina, my ping sucks, yet I join anyways ).

The only criticism I would make is that, if you're gonna advertise the FHGN as a Grizzly Hunt again, the objective (meaning the Warbear) should switch teams more often. The server we played in automatically switched everyone to the opposite team every map, but the teams weren't randomized so they stayed pretty much the same. As teamswitching was limited by the server (and is generally frowned upon), in order to give everyone a fair chance to hunt you, rather than expecting everyone to switch teams, you should have switched teams yourself. I know it's more of a sidequest to the GN, as I was always on your side and saw how you goofed around, but at the same time "I was always on your side", meaning I didnt't even get chances to hunt you.

Great update!

I find amusing how many people is worried that the Bishop will be some kind of OP tank ingame. As a SPG, and fulfilling the role of Artillery ingame, it will probably have 2 seats: 1 for the driver and another for the gunner. Anyone that has ever tried to drive around a Wespe as a tank killer would agree with me that:

1- Requiring switching positions and reloading every time you make an aiming adjustment is a pain.
2- Not having a proper sight while trying to manage huge bulletdrops is even more of a pain.

So, worry not. It would suck as a tank, moreso at the typical range of engagement in NA. You just cannot estimate bulletdrop on distances that high. And, if there's any of these around Europe, whenever you drive to the front you'll will get drilled before even aiming it, because of the prevalesence of 75mm guns there.

Not intended to burst your bubble, but the number 10,000 means that approx. 10,000 people have tried FH2 for at least one time. Your nick gets added to the list when you have logged in and joined a server once, and you don't even have to play one entire round. Also, there are people who have more than one nickname for FH2. And the hardcore players who play everyday still are only some 200.

But: 10,000 looks nice indeed, and with some well placed propaganda we can use it to let FH2 grow even larger.

There's no bubble to burst, you're just stating the obvious fact me and everyone knew before this thread was made. Yet, 10,000 is a nice landmark don't you think? Even if there's not actually 10,000 flesh & bone dedicated players

I think the MB-2 is ok. The usage it gets in game is not very reallistic, but is very fun to drive.

So, while I do think that realism is a great thing to have, so it's fun. And the MB-2 is very fun while not reallistically used. Let's say that it falls just inside the tolerance levels of unrealistic portrayals.

Yet, I must add that its inclusion ingame is a learning experience for the dev team: small & fast vehicles with powerful weapons can and will be used in ways that they were never used or meant to be used IRL, so maybe keeping those kind of vehicles to a minimum in order to keep the battlefield more faithful to the real thing would be wise.