Yeah, that's a good point, i'm no infantryman. But given the choice of carrying two AT4's or one HAT? And in the centre of Fallujiah?Zoddom wrote:if you had the choice to destroy a target from a safe 1000-2000 m distance or from 300-500 m, what would you prefer as an officer?
HAT kit on INS maps post .95
-
Mikemonster
- Posts: 1384
- Joined: 2011-03-21 17:43
Re: HAT kit on INS maps post .95
-
Zoddom
- Posts: 1029
- Joined: 2008-02-11 15:29
Re: HAT kit on INS maps post .95
the rifleman AT kit has only got one AT4.Mikemonster wrote:Yeah, that's a good point, i'm no infantryman. But given the choice of carrying two AT4's or one HAT? And in the centre of Fallujiah?
-
Mikemonster
- Posts: 1384
- Joined: 2011-03-21 17:43
Re: HAT kit on INS maps post .95
Oh. I always stopped my squad from taking HAT in built up areas because I thought LAT was just generally more useful. And I thought that Blufor took HAT on Ins maps because then the Insurgents couldn't have the Lat kit and a free scoped weapon on top of that.
Then there's the 'real life' aspect, which I have no idea about really, but I would presume that the AT4 is lighter and more portable, allowing more ammunition to be carried, and more targets to be engaged (with no disadvantage because the built up area limits range).
But for an Avtar I suppose yes, why not take HAT? It roflpwns. Does it have zoom?
Then there's the 'real life' aspect, which I have no idea about really, but I would presume that the AT4 is lighter and more portable, allowing more ammunition to be carried, and more targets to be engaged (with no disadvantage because the built up area limits range).
But for an Avtar I suppose yes, why not take HAT? It roflpwns. Does it have zoom?