LAT DAMAGE!

[Viper.Sw]

LAT kit does not stop a truck or humvee ingame... That is not very realistic at all.

If you hit a truck or humvee in the front with LAT kit it will not go down (right on the engine should really STOP it).
I dont know about APCs and how much LAT fire they can withstand but since the LAT kits are made to shoot down APCs, I belive the PR damage on this is very bad.

Can most APCs really withstand a blufor LAT kit IRL? Sometimes they have bars/cage on the outside to help them survive LAT shot right, that would mean that the regular armor isnt good enough...

And as RPG-GUNNER said in his post: "LAT should be a spawnable kit".
That will make APCs and other vehicles stay on distance as IRL.

Things that should go down by ONE LAT hit:

APC? depends on which one i guess and if they have bars/cage defence.
Light vehicles. (from all angles)
HMG posts.
Trucks.
All choppers.
Firebase.
AA stationary.
Supply crate.
Jets. (dont know if they do, but they should anyway)
Maybe i missed something out I dont know.

[rampo]

I think the L-AT damage to vehicles is pretty ok now but its damage to inf is just too low, hitting a truck whit a lat according to my book usually stops it overtime

[DankE_SPB]

current APC are very vulnerable, even with proper tactics, spawnable LATs- APCs are useless
biggest concern is bf2 engine do not allow you completely simulate damage of HEAT(and other AP) rounds, whenever you hit APC- it takes damage, while irl when its hits lets say troop compartment and its empty it wont make much damage unless it hits ammoboxes or fuel traces
or you can shoot tank into tracks to death, it gets disable-realistic, it completely blows up-unrealistic
same applies to other vehicles

All choppers.

another example, you hit the bottom of huey- it penetrates hull and hit.... air, why it should get destroyed in 1 shot then?

[Deer]

another example, you hit the bottom of huey- it penetrates hull and hit.... air, why it should get destroyed in 1 shot then?

I think IRL everybody inside that heli would die to the pressure what LAT causes and heli would fall =) LAT kills even if you just stand behind it when its being shot, pressure =) Note how the pressure reflects from the guy who is standing behind the AT, to everybody around him, damaging them as well.

YouTube - Iran-Iraq war accident - where not to stand

[Rudd]

I disagree on the vehicle front. LATs usually make light vehicles burn, and I've seen plenty of APCs go down the same road (burn then die, or become immobilised)

This is desirable for 2 reasons

1) Gameplay, its more fun to try and kill the ejecting crew

2) When you shoot the LAT at the thing its not guarenteed you'd hit something to make it explode, since BF2 has no damage model for specific components like fuel tanks. T

[Thermis]

I've vary rarely seen a light vehicle carry on after being hit with a LAT, it normally catches fire and then explodes after a few seconds, just enough time for the crew to get out and get away. ( As Rudd mentioned this is the really fun part)
Most of the time with APCs, if the crew is smart enough, they will RTB once hit with a LAT and go get fixed up before returning to the fight. However some will sit there until I can find another LAT and finish them off.

[Gore]

Unlimited spawnable RPGs Have been tried out in earlier versions, and it's just overkill. It can be frustrating to hit vehicles that just drives away afterwards, but keep this in mind then, and select your targets more carefully. Wait until they stop and get a good shot. Squadmembers can assist you with guns and finish it off. That's hard if it's a speeding vehicle. Also, the hit box is kinda buggy on moving vehicles sometimes.

[RHYS4190]

These LAT's are designed to pierce the Armour and disrupt key system's in the vehicle it self, like killing the crew. They don't have the power to totally destroy the vehicle just to nock it out of action,

A spalling effect would be more realistic, Say a 50/50 you will warhead will kill the crew, And a 50 chance that your shot will disable the vehicle allowing the crew to escape.


And LAT's should be issued in a greater supply to the infantry, they should not be as scarce and hard to get as they are in game. Maybe 4-6 instead of just 2 per team would improve the situation,

Also reducing or removing the squad limitations for this weapon would be a good idea, so a squad is then allowed to have a LMG LAT and a medic all in the same stick.

And this is just a after thought.

Perhaps remove 2-3 magazines from the kit, and just give him an extra LAT. Just so he has a back up if the first one fails. which is more then likely to happen LAT's are no where near as Accurate and reliable as HAT's and have a very low success rate.

[Rudd]

I don't agree^

You can reload ur LAT

your team has 2 HATs (if both are alive)

and if a friendly squad is nearby...thats 2 LATs.

with that in mind, that is a very dangerous environment for APC level armour and lower.

[RHYS4190]

I don't agree^

You can reload ur LAT

your team has 2 HATs (if both are alive)

and if a friendly squad is nearby...thats 2 LATs.

with that in mind, that is a very dangerous environment for APC level armour and lower.

LAT's are short range weapons, so really if the APC's are smart and keep there distance they will be safe,

, they will no longer be able to safely drive down a squad's throat with impunity.

[Rudd]

And LAT's should be issued in a greater supply to the infantry, they should not be as scarce and hard to get as they are in game. Maybe 4-6 instead of just 2 per team would improve the situation,

LAT's are short range weapons, so really if the APC's are smart and keep there distance they will be safe,

So? the APC has superior range...its good tactics to stand off if not required close in.

[RHYS4190]

Well not drive straight through enemy lines running down entire squad's blasting people to bits and peices.

You should not have been able to use that tactic in the first place, In RL APC's alway's keep there distance away enemy infantry light anti tank are highly distributed in every platoon, it simply suicidal to get in that close.

[Dev1200]

Having a spawnable LAT kit would make the use of APCs redundant versus infantry. Since every squad will have a LAT kit, taking down infantry will definately be your demise.


It's like the cobra in muttrah. Sure, it's useful for single-strikes on apcs, firebases, etc. But it has no armor.. and an APC can easily take it down in 15-20 shots. Which is about 2-3 seconds of fire. I've only seen the cobra be used to a point where its used properly and not wasted in the first 5 minutes.. and thats where you have a game with a clan =P

Also..

RHYS4190 Says: Well not drive straight through enemy lines running down entire squad's blasting people to bits and peices.

You should not have been able to use that tactic in the first place, In RL APC's alway's keep there distance away enemy infantry light anti tank are highly distributed in every platoon, it simply suicidal to get in that close.

Give me the name of the map that has APCs in a large map (not IFVs..) where they can "Keep their distance" from infantry.

[Rudd]

You should not have been able to use that tactic in the first place, In RL APC's alway's keep there distance away enemy infantry light anti tank are highly distributed in every platoon, it simply suicidal to get in that close.

thats my point, how does that have bearing on the characteristics of the LAT kit?

if its close in, you can already kill it.

if its far away you need help or a HAT

This is surely a desirable situation for the game to be in?

[ma21212]

the team should get more LATs, right now i think (not sure) but its 2. LATs should be more availbe like 4 per team scince they might be older and cheaper to make

[StuTika]

I'm fairly sure, being an 'infantry' kit, that there are 3 available per team.

[ryan d ale]

I don't think the number of L-AT or H-AT needs to be increased.

I'm not a regular tanker either and I do encounter situations where I could use an L-AT or H-At but there's none available but I think the system as it stands is really good.

If your team loses the AT gear then that's your teams fault (unfortunately).

If the vehicle is close enough to be disabled/destroyed then that's the crews fault.

Speaking of damage though I would really love to see a 'component damage' system but obviously that isn't going to happen with BF2. Right now, I'm really happy with things.

I'm not sure about helicopters though. I think some helicopters could take more damage than others but no more than 2 RPG hits (even with a Chinhook). Not that the current damage isn't like that nd I'm just expressing an opinion as it goes on topic with the thread.

I think one should send most choppers 'away' for repairs or damage the controls pretty badly.

Anyway bit of a cool thread but personally I think AT can't be improved really - apart from having different warheads for RPG (but I know the damage is back lol).

[Ccharge]

If Lats are not working out for you, your not using it properly. For example. If theres a apc close by make sure your in a good position. If you shoot it and miss or just do some damage your just gunna piss off the crew and get everybodys atention. Make sure as AT your always the first one to strike.

[Rudd]

the team should get more LATs, right now i think (not sure) but its 2. LATs should be more availbe like 4 per team scince they might be older and cheaper to make

I seriously don't think its 2 LATs

its 2 HATs....

iirc there was strict LAT avaliability in .8 but that still had at least one per squad...

and .86 clearly has LATs to spare.

So no, its not 2. I'm willing to bet on that.