Anti tank

Re: Anti tank BS.

SERIALBUTCHER,

You need to keep up on current events.Its unguided in real life but not in BF2

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...41422835066992

Ohhh man, why isn't it like that in the game????? Would be sweet :).

Re: Anti tank BS.

I have used the RPG-7 "in game" & have not known it to be guidable, i am @ work, & can't open your video

Serial, If I understand correctly, he is responding to your post claiming "I wish the SRAW had a fire and forget mode".

Which it does, IRL.

The RPG-7 is fire and forget in the sense once you've fired it, it lacks guidance.It's going where it was shot. both IRL and in the game

The SRAW is fire and forget (IRL) in the way that it finds it's own target.

As you said, it lacks this ability in the game, you have to steer it. Which is both incorrect, and dangerous to the poor AT guy :p

I also wish it was in the game. Makes Shoot and Scoot much easier. However I've gotten pretty good at blind guiding the missile. Simply make your movement and mouse movement match up.

KBK

Re: Anti tank BS.

SERIALBUTCHER,

You need to keep up on current events.Its unguided in real life but not in BF2

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...41422835066992

I have used the RPG-7 "in game" & have not known it to be guidable, i am @ work, & can't open your video

http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?id=8667

peace:)

Re: Anti tank BS.

Anti-Tank is one of my favorite kits, you can get so many kills.

Re: Anti tank BS.

I can live with the fact that the anti tank class can sprint with 120Kg of kit on their back.

I can live with the fact that in BF2 one AT unit can do what in real life takes 3.

I can also live with the fact that in BF2 AT units can go from kneeling to prone without the need for physically removing a post, and fitting a tripod like in real life.

I can also live with the fact that the launch and flight dynamics are drastically at odds with real life for balance and playability.

But I cannot accept that an AT unit can lie under the rear or side of an APC launch the AT rocket into the APC destroying it immediately, and yet survive!

BS!

Ha ha. Dude, where do you get your info from?

The SRAW is a 1 man system. The only thing in BF2 that's multi person about it is the number of weapons the AT carries, THAT would take more than 2 people.

However, both you and SERIALBUTCHER need to ralise that the SRAW is a LONG way from both the LAW and the AT-4 even. The SRAW is a smart, fire and forget weapon that uses top attack. It bypasses all your fancy dancy armour and reactive plates. It dives down onto a target from the top and cuts through the very thin armour found there.

Even the T-90 has this problem.

The SRAW is especially wicked in the fact it uses a breaching charge, followed by a grenade. It's a multi part warhead. The first is a HEAT style charge that blasts burning metal and plasma into the tank, and folloowing through the hole is a grenade style warhead. This then shreds anyone inside a vehicle not blasted, cooked or liquified inside.

It's "fire and forget" for any moving vehicle out to 200m, and for a stationary one out to 500m.

How does this compare to BF2? Well in BF2 you have to aim the weapon. This makes you vulnerable to return fire. IRL the missile uses the laser range finder and an internal magnetic detector to find the vehicle and kill it. In BF2 you've got to laser designate, which is something vastly different from the "How far away is it? Oh" to the "Where is the dot".

Incidently, the weapon only weighs in at 20 pounds. Whats that? A little over 10kg? so 5 of them is 50Kg. Thats one hell of a lot when you add in the MP5 and 3 mags of ammo and a pistol. (4kg for the MP5 and 3 mags and another 1.5kg for the pistol for a total og around 60kg of equipment, and then add BDU's. Thats HALF of what Lazza claimed.

They are also shoulder fired and don't use bi/mono/tripods.

While I don't want the AT in BF2 to be one shot kills (that's too cheasy and no one would use armour) I would like to see the AT get a little more respect.

My suggestion to everything is make it either that the gunner/driver is seperate OR anmd this is the one I like the most, make the drivers a seperate class to whatever he is on foot. If you are an engineer you can't repair nearby vehicles while driving. Make is to a PASSENGER is needed to repair other vehicles.

If you are in a tank and want to make repairs to your buddy APC, either you need to switch to the M2, or you need to take another person along. Same with the APC's. If you want to repair, you have to move to the back. Or carry a passenger.

How does this make th AT's better ? Well now you have the change to get +4 for a sucessful kill, instead of simply +2. If they are solo driving, you don't have the main guns to compete with. Which will lead to increased surviveability.

Makeing the game more fun. And more team play orientated.

KBK

Re: Anti tank BS.

Lazza dont diss my kit, I own whores like you every game. There all the same they *****

Nobody "owns" me when I play. So tell it to the "whores".

Re: Anti tank BS.

Lazza dont diss my kit, I own whores like you every game. There all the same they *****

Re: Anti tank BS.

It's the object that's hit that fragments also though, that's why it's called "splash" (secondary) damage and not primary damage. The combined effects of an AT rockets splash damage, and the splash damage of an APC exploding in your face should kill anyone. If it isn't then why do the APC's occupants die?

After all theoretically it is the splash damage that kills the occupants of the APC as they weren't directly hit themselves. In my example I was further from the combined explosions myself than the AT guy, yet he survived.

I think here we were talking about how if you just miss a player (not a vehicle) with an AT rocket, they suffer no damage, hence my explanation as to why a player may not be affected by an AT round going off close to them.

Thinking about it though, why does a LAV-25 have such massive splash damage when it's firing standard non-explosive ammo?

I dunno, maybe trying to understand BF2 weapon damage by comparing it to real life is a little pointless.

Re: Anti tank BS.

Don't think anybody mentioned this, but the OP claims that anti-tank rockets are overpowered compared to real life. That's the part that struck me as being totally on crack.

IRL, those USMC A/T rockets are one-shot killers on any Soviet-era tanks, especially the T72. Read that again: 1-shot kill. Not three shots, and maybe you'll get lucky, not five shots if the guy's parked near a crate. One shot, and any hit in or over the center of the tank... *poof* the turret does a frying-pan flip into the air.

Such as it is: the MEC uses modern era democratic russian armour.

The real T-90 outperforms the M1A2 quite significantly, has superior armour and a superior tracking unit. It's gun has extended ranges over the ancient t-72 (last constructed in the 1980's, if I'm not mistaken).

As for missles, they're too weak. 2 Anti-tank missles should destroy any vehicle, be it a tank, apc or otherwise. Why? Because tanks are a support unit to the infantry assault, not the assault with the infantry as support.

Re: Anti tank BS.

Just an odd occurance imho. Like the odd teamkills sometimes happen.
Bf2 wouldn't be BF2 without those moments :)

Re: Anti tank BS.

If we're talking about real life, the AT rockets have a shaped charge that's meant to punch a hole in a tank and take out the crew and damage the inside of the tank, not "blow it up", as such.

So, I suppose BF2 reflects that as there is little or no splash damage is it's not a fragmentation weapon.

It's the object that's hit that fragments also though, that's why it's called "splash" (secondary) damage and not primary damage. The combined effects of an AT rockets splash damage, and the splash damage of an APC exploding in your face should kill anyone. If it isn't then why do the APC's occupants die?

After all theoretically it is the splash damage that kills the occupants of the APC as they weren't directly hit themselves. In my example I was further from the combined explosions myself than the AT guy, yet he survived.

Re: Anti tank BS.

It's fun to take the AT class, look for vehicle drops, then set up an ambush to take out all the troops riding in the jeep. Also, AT is good on Daqing, for defending bases or even assaulting certain bases (just make sure you have backup).

Re: Anti tank BS.

I can live with the fact that the anti tank class can sprint with 120Kg of kit on their back.

I can live with the fact that in BF2 one AT unit can do what in real life takes 3.
I can also live with the fact that in BF2 AT units can go from kneeling to prone without the need for physically removing a post, and fitting a tripod like in real life.

I can also live with the fact that the launch and flight dynamics are drastically at odds with real life for balance and playability.

But I cannot accept that an AT unit can lie under the rear or side of an APC launch the AT rocket into the APC destroying it immediately, and yet survive!

BS!

Dude !
In rea life one modern AT rocket fired by one person detonates above the tank, so it doenst even touches it, blows the **** out of the tank.

Second no way they carry 120 KG, maybe 40 KG tops.
120 KG will break soemone's back.

Re: Anti tank BS.

SERIALBUTCHER,

You need to keep up on current events.Its unguided in real life but not in BF2

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...41422835066992

Re: Anti tank BS.

I have to disagree with people saying AT is "a non point class". On certain maps it can be devestating. Play it on Mashturr or sharqi and it is very effective. Basically any map with a lot of jeeps on it is a great map to go AT.

Plus no one plays the class on those maps, you will be thanked by your teammates.