AT vs GL

[DimeBagWhore]

I have seen a lot of people whining recently about the use of AT rockets against infantry and comparing that with using the noob tube at close range. I think the comparison is BS because it's really quite hard to get a kill with the AT. Sure it's a one shot kill, but the AT has so little splash that it really has to be a direct hit to work. Anyway I decided to take a look at the leaderboards for kit equipment to get an idea as to how effective AT rockets are compared to the GL. The comparison is striking.

The top 20 players for GL all have positive k/ds, and most of them are around 2:1 or better. Most of the top 20 players for AT rockets have *negative* k/ds and even the positive ones are close to 1:1. In other words even the top users of AT rockets have trouble killing more than they get killed. That is pretty much what I expected - AT rockets are not an easy way to get kills.

I noticed a couple of other interesting things looking at the top 20 with other weapon types. (1) The most effective weapon appears to be the assault rifle (so maybe you noob tubers really would be better off learning to shoot). (2) The stats for SMGs are just as sad as the stats for AT rockets. Armed with only the stock weapons the AT class really has a tough time.

[BryanG]

Re: AT vs GL

It's not BS at all. For instance, on Oman I will kill a guy in a beach CP from the one in the center with my rockets, very useful! Good for taking out snipers too.

[MiniMizer]

Re: AT vs GL

Then the guy you kill is a moron, because he can see your rocket coming a mile away and get out of the way.

[WolfAlmighty]

Re: AT vs GL

The reason most of the top players use the assault rifle is because the medic kit does not come with a nade launcher. Most of the top guys on the leaderboard play medic on Strike at Karkand all the time which, aside from stat padding and maybe BH running, is the quickest way to rake in the points.

~Wolfgang

[Daz]

Re: AT vs GL

Then the guy you kill is a moron, because he can see your rocket coming a mile away and get out of the way.

Often you are allready scoped in on the guy and shooting him, thus both dying.

The thing that sucks is it kills you so you cannot be revived. It does annoy me but after all Anti Tank should have some grenades and the MP5 should really be alot better than it is.

But lately I have encountered more Eryx/SRAW noobs than noobtubers.

Its often pretty close so by the time you see the rocket you move and it will catch your leg anyway plus they can actually guide the missile. Its just if you see the guy when he sees you.

[ShadowWarrior18D]

Re: AT vs GL

I dont see anything wrong with using the AT

[DimeBagWhore]

Re: AT vs GL

It's not BS at all. For instance, on Oman I will kill a guy in a beach CP from the one in the center with my rockets, very useful! Good for taking out snipers too.

AT rockets can be used to take out infantry at long range, but like MiniMizer said, all they have to do is move, and you will miss. At long range I would much rather have a carbine, a sniper rifle, or an assault rifle (in that order).

But lately I have encountered more Eryx/SRAW noobs than noobtubers.

I think it's easier to kill someone with an assault rifle at any range than it is to kill with an AT round. So why call them noobs?

[Berrern]

Re: AT vs GL

But lately I have encountered more Eryx/SRAW noobs than noobtubers.

I wouldn't call it a noobweapon at all, and I agree with the threadstarter that you can't compare the AT to the noob tube. With the noob tube you can just let off a grenade and get behind cover, and if it hits anywhere near your target he'll die. With AT, on the other hand, you have to be fully visible while guiding, plus you need to do a direct hit to kill. While standing there guiding your rocket you are VERY vulnerable. Plus, your enemy can just jump away when the rocket approaches them - they have plenty of time to react.