AT Rocket use.

MadTommy · Post by **MadTommy** » 2007-03-24 17:32

....open discussion...

Why do some people think it is; unfair, wrong, unethical, unrealistic, pathetic, etc. to use AT munitions on infantry?

I do it. I use whatever resources on the battlefield I can to my advantage, (not including any glitching type tricks).

I know its feckin annoying to get an AT rocket to the face, but so is a sniper headshot, VIEDs and any other instant death. But that is part of the game…

Am I wrong?

Post by **77SiCaRiO77** » 2007-03-24 17:36

they thing that because his beautifull tactics movements are PWN3d by a single player .

but IRL AT missils are AP too , so who cares .

Cerberus · Post by **Cerberus** » 2007-03-24 18:01

Using them on a group of infantry is acceptable... it gets irritating when it's just used on one infantry... and it's completely illogical when you use heavy AT on infantry.

Clypp · Post by **Clypp** » 2007-03-24 18:08

Acceptable at range. Unacceptable as a twitch reaction close range weapon. Same as the UGL.

MadTommy · Post by **MadTommy** » 2007-03-24 18:09

Cerberus wrote:Using them on a group of infantry is acceptable... it gets irritating when it's just used on one infantry... and it's completely illogical when you use heavy AT on infantry.

hmmm illogical... only when you have no re-supply or when you have a target of more importance, ie MBT, APC etc.
When you have lots of ammo the heavy AT is devastating against massed infantry. That is really what I’m on about, wiping out entire squads from 200m with heavy AT.

What do you mean by illogical? (i know what the word means

)

Randleman5102 · Post by **Randleman5102** » 2007-03-24 18:10

Ya I can agree using it on a group, but on one person, thats $500+ out the drain on one guy.

para_hjs · Post by **para_hjs** » 2007-03-24 18:11

At range = ok

CQB = suicide

Post by **77SiCaRiO77** » 2007-03-24 18:12

Randleman5102 wrote:thats $500+ out the drain on one guy.

ya , but i save my life

MadTommy · Post by **MadTommy** » 2007-03-24 18:12

Clypp wrote:Acceptable at range. Unacceptable as a twitch reaction close range weapon. Same as the UGL.

yeah clearly blowing your own feet off to kill someone is not acceptable... very 'smacktarded'

Cerberus · Post by **Cerberus** » 2007-03-24 18:14

It's illogical in the sense that you're using a weapon designed to pierce very thick armor to kill single infantry.

MadTommy wrote:When you have lots of ammo the heavy AT is devastating against massed infantry. That is really what I’m on about, wiping out entire squads from 200m with heavy AT.

That playing style simply disgusts me and I shouldn't even dignify it with a response.

MadTommy · Post by **MadTommy** » 2007-03-24 18:16

Cerberus wrote:That playing style simply disgusts me and I shouldn't even dignify it with a response.

this is exactly what i talking about.... please respond... i simply dont understand why this 'disgusts' you?

Soulja · Post by **Soulja** » 2007-03-24 18:16

Ok, but IRL you would get some serious flak from your CO when you tried to explain why you wasted a VERY expensive rocket on one insurgent 30ft away in the open. So therefore you probably wouldnt do that. And again, IRL a rocket can be used to kill infantry but only if they're hiding, you dont just say: "Whoop, there's a enemy, I'm gona pull out a rocket launcher from thin air while hopping around like a retard on crack and shoot them with it from 10ft without arming the rocket or anything."

*2Recon* · Post by ***2Recon*** » 2007-03-24 18:18

Well high exploding rpg rounds are used in modern warfare to destroy enemies behind cover. If a whole enemy squad is in some corner or near a wall then its perferctly fine to shoot it with a rocket. But the thing is light at bazookas fire a sort of a hot metal carrot that is supposed to penetrate through panzared targets. They would never ever be used agains one or 2 enemies. Lot of people used them so wrong that it takes away the whole purpose of this mod. I for one choose not to kill the enemy sniper with heavy at even if it was the much easier choise...that just isnt realistic in any way.

::Major_Baker:: · Post by **::Major_Baker::** » 2007-03-24 18:18

Randleman5102 wrote:Ya I can agree using it on a group, but on one person, thats $500+ out the drain on one guy.

Since when has saving money ever been a priority for the military? They call in air strikes on single snipers on a regular basis. If it saves the lives of troops, I say go for it.

MadTommy · Post by **MadTommy** » 2007-03-24 18:22

Soulja wrote:Ok, but IRL you would get some serious flak from your CO when you tried to explain why you wasted a VERY expensive rocket on one insurgent 30ft away in the open. So therefore you probably wouldnt do that. And again, IRL a rocket can be used to kill infantry but only if they're hiding, you dont just say: "Whoop, there's a enemy, I'm gona pull out a rocket launcher from thin air while hopping around like a retard on crack and shoot them with it from 10ft without arming the rocket or anything."

err but its not real life.

Its a reality mod of a very arcady game :/ (which i love)

In the game you just have to wait a little time to re-load (and even that is quite short

) no one shouts at you.. lol, maybe your squad mates if you miss

Cerberus · Post by **Cerberus** » 2007-03-24 18:27

MadTommy wrote:this is exactly what i talking about.... please respond... i simply dont understand why this 'disgusts' you?

You're using a ****ing expensive *** weapon (that can save you from armor) to do the job that your rifle could do. Why are you even attempting to justify this? Would you use a Javelin on infantry?

Post by **bosco_** » 2007-03-24 18:27

I really like the usage of LAW's and AT4 in Operation Flashpoint and Armed Assault... when you have it in your hands, you can only crouch and not get up or lay down.
That would put the people off that run around with an RPG in their hands to have an advantage in 1vs1 fights.

Longbow* · Post by Longbow* » 2007-03-24 18:29

AT'ing infantry on medium\long range - ok . AT'ing infantry so you blow yourself - unacceptable .

MadTommy · Post by **MadTommy** » 2007-03-24 18:39

Cerberus wrote:You're using a ****ing expensive *** weapon (that can save you from armor) to do the job that your rifle could do. Why are you even attempting to justify this? Would you use a Javelin on infantry?

Well yes.. i would.. as i stated in my post. It is far more affective than my pistol, especially against a full squad at 200m. I find my pistol a little underpowered for this. I do find my one heavy AT rocket can wipe out the squad, or scatter them badly hurt. I also seem to be very lucky that i dont seem to ever get any invoices for all the rockets i've used in PR over the last year or so, weird that.
But to be a little for serious, i only use it on infantry when ALL the enemy heavy assets have been destroyed.

I'm not trying to justify it, i have, to myself.
I'm trying to find out what the forum consensus is. I'm interest in your opinion.
So if i'm not mistaken, for you it is 'disgusting' because it is expensive equipment in real life and because of this should only be used on tanks and APCs. That is fair enough, emmersion into the reality side of the mod is not a bad thing.

Post by **LeadMagnet** » 2007-03-24 19:31

Randleman5102 wrote:Ya I can agree using it on a group, but on one person, thats $500+ out the drain on one guy.

And this is better than the idiot that uses a 3 million dollar LAV III as a battle taxi?