AT not used on armor

[raceacontari]

Re: AT not used on armor

Lol...this topic is funny....this is a video game people...and just so you know I know of several instances of US marines firing a form of rocket launcher to kill infanty. You use whatever you have with you...and this is a video game....it's not supposed to be realistic. If you dont think people shoot missle launchers at each other in real life, tell that to soldiers in Iraq that have to deal with something called an RPG

[spaceace]

Re: AT not used on armor

I wonder why you Sir are insulting me.

That would have been your use of the word "boon" which is admittedly little-used nowadays but is still recognisable as a racial epithet. Taking into account the video you were describing it's easy to assume that to be the reason you used the word. TBH I think I've seen the same video before described that way.

However, looking into things further I'm guessing you intended another meaning

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=BOON

Now, if you'd used zero's instead of o's I'd have understood :) Apologies for the mix up

Who said the internet makes you stupid?

[AlphaNut]

Re: AT not used on armor

I see what you mean spaceace. I did refer to the word "Noob".
Apology accepted, and I appreciate you clearing this up since the use of the word "boon" could be quiet embarrassing in some situations if misunderstood. Tbh I wasn't aware of the other meaning.
I'll use 00 if I should ever happen to use this word in the future. But it's not that intelligent of a word anyways, so I might aswell remove it from my Dictionary

[Xurreal]

Re: AT not used on armor

On a related note, anyone else find the irony that SRAW means Short-Range Assault Weapon?

[iewgnem]

Re: AT not used on armor

Most people who play the AT kit will have DAO unlocked right?
So, in close combat, why would ANYONE "noob rocket" when he can kill you with the DAO, which, tbh is far more effective than counting your life on that rocket with hit box problem and no spash damage.

If someone kills me with an AT rocket, close combat or distant, I congragulate them for their luck and skill, rather than whine, because its far harder to kill someone with the AT rocket than with the DAO.

[Hu.Z_of_PLA]

Re: AT not used on armor

i am surpised that nobody called DAO12 a noob cannon, afterall, the auto shotty in CS was a noob cannon, and In CSers' minds, anything other than pistol = cheap.

[Keith Maniac]

Re: AT not used on armor

I once tried to stab an enemy soldier but he shot me with an assault rifle. I died and called him noob afterwards. Seems to me that noobtubers have moved to assault rifles.

[Hu.Z_of_PLA]

Re: AT not used on armor

I once tried to stab an enemy soldier but he shot me with an assault rifle. I died and called him noob afterwards. Seems to me that noobtubers have moved to assault rifles.

I once ran over a dude who stand in front of my type 98 holding a knife, he claimed that i should have given him a fair chance of knife fight.

I replied that this is not a Jedi Sabre battle game.

[sumguyhavinfun]

Re: AT not used on armor

The Predator SRAW is capable of defeating all current and future main battle tanks, including those incorporating advanced armor protection, supplemental armor kits, and Explosive Reactive Armor (ERA). The Predator features an advanced guidance- and-control system, a soft-launch capability, and a lethal, explosively-formed penetrator warhead. Once launched, the missile flies in a top-attack (i.e., fly over, shoot down) profile and uses optical and magnetic sensors to detect the target and detonate the warhead. Predator can effectively engage moving targets from 17 to 200 meters and stationary targets from 17 to 600 meters.

The Multipurpose Individual Munition / Short Range Assault Weapon (MPIM/SRAW) is the future answer for effectively defeating personnel in three different environments: behind masonry/brick walls, within earth and timber bunkers and in light armored vehicles. Ideally suited for MOUT environments, MPIM/SRAW will replace the LAW, AT-4, and other light shoulder fired weapons.

Armour and Inf

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/sraw.htm

I use on Inf all the time but mostly vehicles of course.

:)

[Six.]

Re: AT not used on armor

Anti-Tank Missles like the AT4 are not meant as anti personel, they are meant to take out vehicles, weak structures, and armor. Anyone who uses it against infantry isnt being very realistic. Unfortunatly this is an option left in the game. If it will become an anti personel missile then I dont see why they shouldnt make it harder to nail people with, often someone who is prone and occupide with something else, sees a rocket intime, but simply jumping doesnt save your life. Rockets also cause death unhealable by medic which is frustrating. By all means it is a frustrating experience to be pwned by a rocket and it doesnt take much skill because the rounds can be moved if you try and run. It is a guided missile remember. Until BF2 and EA make it harder I dont expect to see a decline in this, but it is unfortunatly a strong tactic. I personally wont use it, but I am practicing avoiding these attacks.

Thing is- it is realistic. In real life- if you (an infantry) get hit by an anti-tank missile... what happens? you think it's going to bounce off you because you don't have plates of armor and 4 (or more) wheels?

Thats like you putting an arguement up that C4 is not supposed to kill infantry because it's meant to destroy commander assets or vehicles, or that Helo TV missiles aren't meant to be used on infantry because it's meant to destroy tanks and other vehicles.

Other than that... of course you can't be revived by a medic when you're hit by a friggin AT missile! think a little further mate! if a friggin missile that can destroy armoured vehicles hits a soft-fleshed vertebrate like say... a human being (even if he is wearing bullet-proof vests), what's the next best thing that a medic can do?... PICK UP YOUR PIECES AND PUT THEM IN A BOX! Grrr!

BF2 is also meant to be an emulation of a battlefield... I think it's why they call it battlefield :P not 'Battle-Fantasy Land where my missiles must only kill vehicles'.

The only thing I reckon should be tweaked- is probably giving more points to AT infantry for destroying vehicles- so then... yes, they'll make a slight more effort to put their AT missiles to a more practical use- I mean, the only thing I have against people using AT missiles on infantry is that it's a waste of good limited ordinance.
Other than that... all of the explosions from missiles and other ordinance in BF2 are a little small... a package of C4 about that big- should really come with a bigger bang in real life... and the AT missiles- the explosion radius is a little too small.

[Gulf_War_Syndrome]

Re: AT not used on armor

Wow, I just read this entire thread - I've gotta say it was really quite amusing. I'm glad to see the "AT vs Infantry is n00b" theory well and truly smacked down!

I'm proud to say I have more time and kills with the AT rocket than any other weapon or vehicle (#42 or so on the AT rocket leaderboard). Yes, a lot of those would be infantry kills too.

I think everything that needs to be said has already been said, but the heart of the "problem" was only just touched on above by Six, and I'd like to clarify it a little bit.

Anyone who has played any anti-tank knows how much they get screwed over (score wise) when taking down armour. You know the drill... you first destroy the tank's supply crate, then use 2-3 rockets to damage the tank, only to have the occupant bail out and run away. You've just used up to four precious rockets helping out your team for what? For some resupply guy to scab points from you (I love resupply dudes don't get me wrong!).

So what do you do about it?
Best option is to rocket snipe the guy who bailed from the tank!
Failing that, you play a game I like to do every now and then. It's called "Six Rockets, Six Kills". OK, it's just rocket sniping as many people as you can before you run out of ammo. Yes, it is possible to get more than six kills with six rockets, just think of six as "par for the course".

The point being that the game offers no incentive for an anti-tank troop to shoot at armour (and don't try and say a random damage assist point). If an APC or tank kill was worth 3 points, that would be a good start.


In any case, out-sniping snipers with the ERYX is funny, and always will be!

[Tysn]

Re: AT not used on armor

Anyone who has played any anti-tank knows how much they get screwed over (score wise) when taking down armour. You know the drill... you first destroy the tank's supply crate, then use 2-3 rockets to damage the tank, only to have the occupant bail out and run away.

That drives me nuts when I'm playing AT. Even worse is when you manage to hit an attack chopper twice (merely setting it on fire of course ) and as it's flying away to its death some moron on your team sprays his rifle at it and gets credit for both the kills.

[Gulf_War_Syndrome]

Re: AT not used on armor

Even worse is when you manage to hit an attack chopper twice (merely setting it on fire of course ) and as it's flying away to its death some moron on your team sprays his rifle at it and gets credit for both the kills.

That's what your DAO-12 is for - to make sure you get the last shot on a flaming chopper!
It reminds me of duck hunting or something... :)

[iflabs]

Re: AT not used on armor

WTH! The game will never be played the way it was expected to play, no game ever has.

Complaints against "noobtubes" and now AT rockets???!!! Get some skills!

[Six.]

Re: AT not used on armor

I think everything that needs to be said has already been said, but the heart of the "problem" was only just touched on above by Six, and I'd like to clarify it a little bit.

The point being that the game offers no incentive for an anti-tank troop to shoot at armour (and don't try and say a random damage assist point). If an APC or tank kill was worth 3 points, that would be a good start.

In any case, out-sniping snipers with the ERYX is funny, and always will be!

Thanks- well, it is true- there's virtually no benefit in being AT because you simply get ordinary points for doing what the kit's meant to do. Medics get healing points, Engineers get repair points, SpecOps get asset demolishing points, Support gets supply points, assault and sniper... well they're built for pretty much all-purpose combat, they can easily reap points from doing what they do. Plus- they all have decent weapons for intense infantry combat.

But AT- their weapon capabilities are already limited to what seems to be non-infantry engagement, and their function is limited to just a few missiles, they usually need other troops to cover their asses when the action gets a little more intense than just facing a vehicle or two. And when they do need to retreat - they can't get any further than 30 or so metres before the bullets begin to catch up to them because of their 'heavy payload'.

Don't whinge, people- AT have it tough enough as it is; I'm rather humbled by the fact that AT people would go far enough to have a little versatility in their function rather than just shooting at cars and tanks.

Once I was saved by the mighty AT- I was surrounded - and my escape was cut off by an enemy vehicle and troops; the 2 AT guys came to my rescue- blew the vehicle out of the way, and got rid of the troops (WITH THEIR SPARE 'AT' MISSILES)- we all backed out to find some cover in order to regain our post. Ah, such is the beauty of teamwork.