The Last word on anti-tank gun POLL

[Kleinzeit]

The gun is unbelievably sucky, (unless you get the DAO), but then, Assault guys don't get to kill many vehicles. The missiles are about right, I think.

[The Medic]

I don't use it much but the missle seams right, too much power and who would want armor? The tanks and such should get correctly proportioned armor though, ya know, heavy up front and light on the rear and underneath. The smg is meant to be poop...

[Blackburn]

but also i'd like to add that they should have a larger explosion area.. if i have it out and shoot at a person and it hits rite at there feet it wont kill them which is ball.. they have a death radias of a couple meters

[janosriippa]

Ummm... why call something antitank when 3 direct hits doesn't destroy a tank? 2 - 3 direct hits to front or back of a tank and 1 - 2 if shot either left or right side. I think they call them antitank because they should be there to destroy them. Right?

What is the use if I guard a road to few last flags and I have my antitank weapon ready. I shoot, I hit but it still is going like no tomorrow. I would understand if I hit somewhere where the armor is most thickest, but hey... side of a tank is the weakest spot or right under the... hmm... what is the word... the moving part of the tank where the cannon is.

Now you can go anywhere with a tank and you only have to bother if there is assault helicopter nearby.

[glasseye]

What is the use if I guard a road to few last flags and I have my antitank weapon ready. I shoot, I hit but it still is going like no tomorrow. I would understand if I hit somewhere where the armor is most thickest, but hey... side of a tank is the weakest spot or right under the... hmm... what is the word... the moving part of the tank where the cannon is.

the weakest armour is at the rear, the top and the bottom. the moving cannon bit is called a turret.

[Fiasc0]

I think its just right. Alone vs Tank is a Problem , but as a Squad who have 3 ppl as AT - believe me - no Tank will join your area.
An damage Upgrade for Rockets ( damage radius like grenades ) would destroy the balance of classes. Everyone will play AT then, because its useful against Infantry.
An damage upgrade to TOW/HJ-8 had the same effect. No chance for Tanks anymore.

I agree at the point , that a Lonewolf AT guy is unuseful, but hey this is exactly the point to remember you why this game support Squads/ teamplay. 2 At guys rock the world. Oh and if you still have Problems against Infantry , you should try the DAO-12 ( Streetsweeper) . You will agree with me , to kill 4 ppl is no dream anymore.
I played 3d 23h 45m AT class , i used the AT for 1d 2h 18m and made 996 kills.
I used the DAO-12 shotgun for 1d 8h 26m and made 1590 Kills.
Im absolutly satisfied with this class like it is.

[Cirap]

hit it from the back, or worst case, the side.

If you find yourself infront of a tank, save your ammo, and flank it

[Faint_Uk]

I think it needs to hurt tanks more, ok on jeeps etc. though

[donnieb]

The missles are horrible you expend over half your ammo to take out a single tank. You should only need 1-2 missles to take out a tank and that would still be balanced as the tanker gets a warning messag when he/she has been targeted.

the actually gun th AT gets is well perfect for balance of the game, but why would anyone bring an MP5 into battle. MP5's are mainly used for urban close quarter encounters.

[jdogg88-Fed]

needs more power

[foestauf]

Definatly needs more power. It is rediculously underpowered.
Works great on Jeeps and dune buggy's but they move so fast it's hard to get em.
Give it, I don't think it should take out an M1A2 in one hit. But even primative RPG's can destroy less armour'd tanks in a good hit.
However if this game implements Stryker vehicles they should be very well vs AT due to this outer cage style system that is designed to have an AT4/RPG style weapon explode on the roll cage.

[ravenwebb]

WTF!!!!

you are talking about the rockets i presume?

heat seeking? wtf? more power? wtf?

worst thread yet...

[HicRic]

AT rocket does not need more power. Two shots kills a tank. That's just fine with me.
Even if you're in a place where you can only reasonably hit the front, aim for the tracks. Two hit kill. Just like against the rear armour.

Nothing wrong with that, is there?

[Thelron]

However if this game implements Stryker vehicles they should be very well vs AT due to this outer cage style system that is designed to have an AT4/RPG style weapon explode on the roll cage.

I read a very interesting govt. report about the Stryker program... apparently that is one of the many many features of the series which just plain don't work as well as they'd like you to think (The full program has been found to be... flawed... and the vehicles themselves aren't all they're cracked up to be).

On-topic, I think they're basically fine (remember, this isn't just a plain exploding rocket these things are supposedly firing, its intended to expend all of its force on a very small area in front of it, so a big blast radius would be excessive even in the BF world) but need to be a bit more 'wobbly' in flight, so it isn't as easy to 'snipe' with the things (for all the folks complaining how hard it is to kill infantry with the things, just don't go AT, or let your assault/sniper/medic/specops/support squaddies deal with ranged infantry while you take cover and protect them from armor).

[sicdeath]

The rockets are fine to me. Its the smg that need more power especially the one the Chinese have. That's the worst gun and it looks like the mp40 :hmm: Yet it doesn't perform like the mp40 from ww2, lol :laugh:

-rahul