AT Rocket use.

[MadTommy]

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

too true lol

[Cerberus]

What's wrong with using an LAV as a troop transport?

[RikiRude]

HAT should only be used on high priority targets. The ONLY time it should be used on a single soldier is if it is a sniper or marksman, which should mean they are at a distance of 100 meters+ (that is if they are a good sniper). The problem is that you can have a rifleman next to you and just spam the rockets for as long as you want. IRL you would have one maybe three rockets and that's it until you get to a base or something along those lines.

It's a bad tactic if it's something that PR is trying to fix

Things like, takes time to arm, long reload times that can't be exploited, and not being able to get rockets from riflemen.

[ubiquitous]

IRL you would have one maybe three rockets and that's it until you get to a base or something along those lines.

Surely, in real life, the same could be said of ordinary small arms munitions—there's no rifleman with a magic ammo bag for that either?

I say that, provided that the performace and behaviour of the AT munitions is accurately modelled, anything goes (glitches/exploits notwithstanding). The whole point of this game is to put the player into a simulated combat situation. Taking tactical decisions in that situation is what the game is all about. If the player decides that the best use for his AT round is to take out enemy infantry then that's his or her prerogative. Time will ultimately determine the validity of that decision.

Particularly effective is putting AT in through windows or doors of buildings being used as cover by enemies during a flag cap.

The only thing that is perhaps a little dubious is the practise of firing off AT when it will inevitably kill you as well as your target i.e. extreme close range. The only reason I say this is that in real life one might be inclined to attach a little more weight to the importance of not killing oneself than is the case in the game.

Perhaps longer spawn times are in order after a suicide?

You're using a ****ing expensive *** weapon

I can assure you that a rocket is a good deal less expensive, effective, versitile and above all valuable than a trained soldier. You'll not find a C/O anywhere in the (non autocratic) world who would rather see a patrol coming back with a dead squad mate than sans AT round.

[Cerberus]

Surely, in real life, the same could be said of ordinary small arms munitions—there's no rifleman with a magic ammo bag for that either?

Are you implying that real soldiers carry 1-3 rounds of ammo?

I'm pretty sure your real troop is gonna be carrying 240-300 rounds provided he's using an assault rifle

[LeadMagnet]

What's wrong with using an LAV as a troop transport?

I'm not talking about those that actually use it for a transport. Just the brainless wastes of skin that hop in an APC, rush into battle, hop out and leave it camped for their fellow teammates to unknowingly spawn into certain death.

[Cerberus]

Well, the AAV-7A1 is sometimes referred to as a battle taxi and that carries an entire squad.

[Sneak Attack]

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

thats the worst way to think of it. it costs hundreds of thousands if not in the millions to train/equip/pay/house 1 soldier. $500 vs millions? seems an easy decision to me.

look at the whole Somalia incident, that whole fight was because of a rescue mission.

You cant put a price on someones life


the only time being killed by a AT is gay is when the person that shot it at you kills themselves with you. that happens just because they cant aim for shit and have to take the easy way out.

[El_Vikingo]

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

As far as I know there's nothing wrong with that. Hence the "PC" in "APC".

[xseeyax]

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.

What's wrong with using it on one person? I think it would be worse if the guy used it on a group because that means more of your team gone, like if you were trying to cap a flag, but for the one person just let the idiot waste it.

[Guerra]

When I was in the reserves, a few guys told me that they had used a LAW on an infantry position.

So it happens.

When you're at war, its either them or you.

[xseeyax]

When I was in the reserves, a few guys told me that they had used a LAW on an infantry position.

So it happens.

When you're at war, its either them or you.

lol, good point

[JL]

completely fine in my opinion, HAS PR NOT SEEN RPG FISHING!?!?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vcM3VZpUnCA

[ArmedDrunk&Angry]

on Gulf of Oman WAC tonight we were at village near the stone building with the AAA on top and somebody in cnstruction was chewing us up with HAT.
It's not always used in a totally realistic way but then again it is a game and it's an effective weapon if properly fed and operated.
I support the " all the weapons you can use" school of thought as long as you are not glitching or cheating in some way.

[Wolfe]

I would imagine that in real war, AT is only used in certain conditions because the ammo is limited and resupply isn't in a backpack 20m away.

In PR, I think the complaint is that it's too much like the "noobtoob", in that they're easy to get with unlimited ammo potential, are super accurate with nearly zero aim time required. Basically a skillless weapon in a game that is primarily focused around skill: An RPG/rocket is slung around the soldier's back; it should take much more time to switch from a machine gun to the rpg/rocket and then more time to aim. Right now it's nearly insta-shoot-kill.

[jackal22]

1. they cost £24000 so around $45000

2. YOU HAVE A FRIGGIN RIFLE -i hate players that use the at rocket over a perfect functional rifle. that is waht realy gets me.

3. If your heavy AT, what the hell are you doing running around with no squad support?

[MadTommy]

In PR, I think the complaint is that it's too much like the "noobtoob", in that they're easy to get with unlimited ammo potential, are super accurate with nearly zero aim time required. Basically a skillless weapon in a game that is primarily focused around skill: An RPG/rocket is slung around the soldier's back; it should take much more time to switch from a machine gun to the rpg/rocket and then more time to aim. Right now it's nearly insta-shoot-kill.

finally, talking about PR

I'd agree to a certain extent with what you say here, killing 1 or 2 infantry with a single shot, is VERY easy. But to call the heavy AT a skillless weapon so WAY off the mark.
Using it effectively over an extended period takes skill and tactical awareness.
You become target number one. A very hunted asset. It takes teamwork to keep a heavy AT troop fully functional.

Needing to save your loaded rocket for 'priority' targets, (MBT & APCs), is not always required, for example, EJOD, sometimes you know when the enemy has 5 mins b4 they get any armour back in the field. Using your AT on grouped infantry is the best you can do for the team at that point, if you are heavy AT.

[Raniak]

. YOU HAVE A FRIGGIN RIFLE -i hate players that use the at rocket over a perfect functional rifle. that is waht realy gets me.

Yeah, everyone know that you can kill a whole squad over 300m with a pistol(heavy AT get pistol)...
if a squad of bad guys was coming to kill you, you wouldn't say "hey, let's wait for them to get closer to flank us, I'm sure I can get them with my rifle !" but you would fire at them with your AT weapon and blow them into little pieces...

[JL]

well you guys keep talking about heavy AT but i don't think thats the "highly abused" you are talking about.. isn't it the RPGs at close range? an insurgent that is RPG equipped only has a pistol!! have you guys ever used the RPG class or do you just team switch to USMC every round?