Definition of HAT sniping

Golden7B · Post by **Golden7B** » 2007-11-06 23:07

Ok I just want to be sure of what is the definition of HAT sniping. If you are on your way to get a tank, or apc, and then you end up face to face with an ennemy infantry (at a range that you can shoot him without exploding yourself too....), what should you do to avoid being seen as a hat sniper??(the ennemy has spotted you and is either taking shots at you or on his way too.,....)
1) Get down, grab your pistol and wait for him, or his grenade. (if you have something to hide with...)
2) Let him kill you and die thinking, "Oh well at least im not a hat sniper"
3) Shoot the hell out of him with your HAT
4) Nothing cause the time you thought about it, he already managed to kill you....
???

I feel that in a scenario like that, my reflex would be to kill him instantly.

Can someone clarify for me what is considered hat sniping?

Thanks

Alex6714 · Post by **Alex6714** » 2007-11-06 23:13

Yes. Someone is shooting at me, possiblility of getting more ammo, and no higher priority (read APC) target nearby then he gets a rocket in his face. Better than trying to get him with a pistol, fail, and lose a H-AT to the other team...

Ragni<RangersPL> · Post by **Ragni<RangersPL>** » 2007-11-06 23:13

Well, sometimes you just don't have a choice...

... Shoot him with your new shiny H-AT

Post by **77SiCaRiO77** » 2007-11-07 00:01

im still wonder why we have a HAT in phoenix if there is not armor there :/.

Waaah_Wah · Post by **Waaah_Wah** » 2007-11-07 00:01

I will shoot him with my H-AT. I love using it on infantry

So damn effectife when you have some ammo and no more important targets

BetterDeadThanRed · Post by **BetterDeadThanRed** » 2007-11-07 00:09

Waaah_Wah wrote:I will shoot him with my H-AT. I love using it on infantry So damn effectife when you have some ammo and no more important targets

It's cheap, unrealistic, and damn annoying. I use the HAT kit a lot and I make sure to avoid using it on unfortified infantry whenever possible. I know how frustrating it can be to get sniped by some happy-go-lucky noob who just wants to get some free kills rather than help his team fight off armor.

Golden7B · Post by **Golden7B** » 2007-11-07 00:15

I agree but there is always two extremes.... Its also annoying being on a server X to the TG

and having ppl complaining about hat sniping even though the shot was very legitimate.....

But hey, there will always be abuses on both sides!!

<1sk>Headshot · Post by **<1sk>Headshot** » 2007-11-07 00:18

Get a squad. Use VOIP. Ask them to cover/escort you. Kill armour. Is it really that hard?

Eddiereyes909 · Post by **Eddiereyes909** » 2007-11-07 00:19

When theres a bunker full of troops, im going to use a HAT.

It kills, there for i use it on fortified infantry.

If they are far away, then i would get one of my squaddies to kill him.

Bowskill · Post by **Bowskill** » 2007-11-07 00:24

H3eadshot wrote:Get a squad. Use VOIP. Ask them to cover/escort you. Kill armour. Is it really that hard?

There will always be situations, where for whatever reason it is a case of shoot him with HAT or die. In this situation, IMO, it is realistic to use it, if you had a choice between using a 20k or however much it is weapon or death what would you choose?

Golden7B · Post by **Golden7B** » 2007-11-07 00:36

Bowskill wrote:There will always be situations, where for whatever reason it is a case of shoot him with HAT or die. In this situation, IMO, it is realistic to use it, if you had a choice between using a 20k or however much it is weapon or death what would you choose?

Exactly! And if the guy didnt see me, ill just duck and wait for cover.

Viper5 · Post by **Viper5** » 2007-11-07 00:37

Heavy AT Sniping should be defined as:

The killing of footborne enemy combatants with a Heavy Anti-Tank system (SRAW,Eryx) while they are not in a fortified or covered position such as a bunker, trench, building or roof.

Golden7B · Post by **Golden7B** » 2007-11-07 00:38

[R-PUB]Viper5 wrote:Heavy AT Sniping should be defined as:

The killing of footborne enemy combatants with a Heavy Anti-Tank system (SRAW,Eryx) while they are not in a fortified or covered position such as a bunker, trench, building or roof.

Looking at my title, i guess that closes the subject!
tx

*spacecadett* · Post by ***spacecadett*** » 2007-11-07 00:47

shouldent your squad be able to support you!

Bowskill · Post by **Bowskill** » 2007-11-07 00:48

[R-PUB]Viper5 wrote:Heavy AT Sniping should be defined as:

The killing of footborne enemy combatants with a Heavy Anti-Tank system (SRAW,Eryx) while they are not in a fortified or covered position such as a bunker, trench, building or roof.

(IMO) and/or when they do not pose an immediate (ie close range and firing at you) threat.

CDN-SMOKEJUMPER · Post by **CDN-SMOKEJUMPER** » 2007-11-07 01:05

If I have ammo I'll use any cheap tactic I can to kill the opposition and not die myself. I'll HAT snipe, noob toob and light AT my way through the map and all the people who start screaming noob just make me laugh.

Mostly I'm an MG whore though. It really annoys me when people get bent out of shape when they get killed. This is war and everything other than exploits are fair and realistic. People will use everything they have on hand to fight with.

IED's aren't fair now are they.

SGT.JOKER · Post by **SGT.JOKER** » 2007-11-07 01:20

I think in some cases it should be allowed like for instance on Mestia (or any other map with large bunkers) the HAT gunner should be allowed to go "bunker busting" with it.

blud · Post by **blud** » 2007-11-07 01:30

What is up with people who cry about HAT Sniping? Should the HAT be in maps like OpPhoenix? That's a game question, talk to the devs about that. But as long as there is a HAT there to be used, then so be it.

It is stupid and annoying when someone on your team is using a vehicle or kit in a less than fully effective way - because it is a waste and it doesn't help the team as much as it could - or even hurts the team. So if someone wastes a HAT shot on killing 1 infantry when there are enemy vehicles around that need to be blown up, then that is seriously stupid. However, if there are no vehicles around, and the guy with the HAT has ammo right by him in the form of a supply box, jeep, ammo, etc, then he should use the HAT to kill groups of infantry, and if all he can see is 1 infantry then he should go for it since he can reload and have another rocket ready to go well before a vehicle comes at him.

And if I come around a corner with my HAT or Grenadier kit, and am face to face with an enemy, what helps my team more: Not shooting him, obviously getting killed by him and losing the kit to the enemy, OR, shooting him even though it means I die too, and increases the chance that the enemy won't get the kit?

Something you'll never heard from me in a game is "No fair!!! That was cheap." If something is truly cheap then you should be able to counter it. If you can't counter it, then it's not cheap, it's smart. Like when iGi whored the shit out of rockets and rooftops against [T] on Jabal 16. LOL! I don't blame them at all, it was a great plan. But I did end up removing rockets from the PRL 6v6 ladder config, because all parties involved agreed that even though they would use rockets cuz they had to because of how awesome it was, they'd rather not have rockets available. But pubs are just a free-for-all fun fest, so I think rockets are cool there.

SGT.JOKER wrote:I think in some cases it should be allowed like for instance on Mestia (or any other map with large bunkers) the HAT gunner should be allowed to go "bunker busting" with it.

I think it should be always allowed under any circumstances. If the game truly has a problem, then it should be fixed at the game level, not by people imposing arbitrary and subjective rules on top of the game that cannot be uniformly enforced. That would be like saying scopes are cheap, and no one should use scoped guns.

MrD · Post by **MrD** » 2007-11-07 02:17

I remember when a load of servers for Joint Operations Typhoon Rising banned RPG's used against infantry. Was stupid really, especially since a number of rounds including anti-infantry are available for the soviet class RPG's.

I also remember my bro (an arty Major) telling me that they drop 1000lb bombs on single insurgents if it kills them.

So, if our armies in afghanistan are doing stuff like that, why shouldn't we in game? place an artifical rule against using whatever is at hand to save lives and you twist away from realism and the games intentions. Some people obviously got a few problems with getting hit by £20,000 worth of missile and want to stop it happening so they have the ability to kill 2 members of the other side without them being able to adequately fight back.

Next they will ban shooting medics, so a new tactic will appear where they walk through the enemy reviving everyone after the enemy has passed to take over the map and runi the gameplay. But however strange it sounds, people will always push and there will always be those who vote for the BNP too.