Project Reality Forums

^Pardon, If I understood you wrong, but the Chinese HAT isn't guided.

ShockUnitBlack wrote:I did not say that.

Yes, you did.

ShockUnitBlack wrote: IMO the UK has the worst small arms and the Militia has the best ones (exception being the scoped SAW).

As for this

ShockUnitBlack wrote:By your logic a musket is as good as weapon as a MG42.

a) Ammo count is a situational factor, thus irrelevant to the effectiveness. We are talking about the effectiveness of the blast versus infantry, not how many shots you can waste at infantry.
b) Your comparison here is...well, moronic at best.

ComradeHX wrote:Chinese HAT non-guided. Good one.

It isn't play the game and try. It is a PF-98 which shoots straight with no drop.

ComradeHX wrote:Chinese HAT non-guided. Good one.

Chinese HAT guided. Good one.

CroCop wrote:Yes, you did.

No, I said

IMO the UK has the worst small arms and the Militia has the best ones

which is not the same thing as

(remember this discussion started with your statement on how the UK suck and how the Militia are supposedly OP).

... And you still haven't posted any evidence disproving what I've said.

Not going to waste my time posting any further here.

You may say that the L85A2 suck but it has the highest muzzel veolocity of all assault rifles in PR. This gives it a big advantage at long range and shooting moving targets. Same goes with the L85 marksman.

Souls Of Mischief wrote:^Pardon, If I understood you wrong, but the Chinese HAT isn't guided.

It has horrible deploy time, low movespeed when deployed, AND no tracking...

Which just means it has lower reliable-killing range than tracking ones but with all the disadvantages(number of rounds carried and deploy time).


Also, I hit a Russian tank on side armour one time from about 100m away and it did not even smoke... I would take a RPG-7 with tandem head instead(as soon as scope is fixed; because if it worked like SPG-9 scope, RPG would be MUCH more effective than it is right now).

It has horrible deploy time, low movespeed when deployed,

it has the fastest deploy speed ingame and the same movespeed as everyone else?....

edit, nvm I think your talking about the RPG not the Chi hat, though dunno what you mean by movespeed, because that is the same

ComradeHX wrote:It has horrible deploy time, low movespeed when deployed, AND no tracking...

Which just means it has lower reliable-killing range than tracking ones but with all the disadvantages(number of rounds carried and deploy time).


Also, I hit a Russian tank on side armour one time from about 100m away and it did not even smoke... I would take a RPG-7 with tandem head instead(as soon as scope is fixed; because if it worked like SPG-9 scope, RPG would be MUCH more effective than it is right now).

ComradeHX wrote:Chinese HAT non-guided. Good one.

So since you son't know what you are talking about, and since rudd just corrected you on two of your points, and on the other you keep flip flopping, can you please stop posting flase info. The chinese HAT, while not guided can be set up quicker, and has the quickest rocket speed(not sure, seems like it though) out of all the HATs. It flies perfectly straight with no deviation. Ofcourse the guided ATs are better, but just barely compared to the chinese HAT. Where as the tandem is a 3rd rate HAT.

Now as for the thread title. I hate three round burst ingame, but I also don't want to see it changed for simple realism reasons. From my understanding full auto, or burst wouldn't be used like it is ingame because of how troops are trained and how guns handle IRL. But in PR the constant feedback of full auto is the easiest to control with the mouse, compared to the jumping of burst.

chrisweb89 wrote:So since you son't know what you are talking about, and since rudd just corrected you on two of your points, and on the other you keep flip flopping, can you please stop posting flase info. The chinese HAT, while not guided can be set up quicker, and has the quickest rocket speed(not sure, seems like it though) out of all the HATs. It flies perfectly straight with no deviation. Ofcourse the guided ATs are better, but just barely compared to the chinese HAT. Where as the tandem is a 3rd rate HAT.

Last time I checked, you still wait very long time when switching to PF-89. Around 10 seconds for PF-89 versus around 7 for RPG.
With PF-89, you still move like crawl(or worse) when aiming with it while crouched; and still cannot fire while prone.
RPG-7 actually lets you move at almost standing speed when aiming.

This is probably the wrong thread to discuss AT weapons. If you want to go on with this discussion, please find a proper thread or create a new one.

I will only reply once in this thread, to show some "numbers" about the chinese (and other) HATs.

There are roughly three categories of HATs:

-guided (US, MEC, GB)
-unguided without missiledrop (IDF, CH)
-unguided with missile drop (GER, RUS)


-Guided HATs have a 18,75s reload time
-IDF (7,3s), CH (10s), GER (8s), RUS (6s)

All HATs have a mouseSpeedMod of 0.5 when zoomed.

HATs (according to files) that can be fired prone: IDF, GER, RUS

All HATS (except the RUS one) have devModZoom of 0.1 (rpgs 0.2 = twice the deviation when zoomed).

CH:
turn settle time: 5s
move settle time: 5s

IDF:
turn settle time: 1s
move settle time: 4s

GER:
turn settle time: 1s
move settle time: 4s (seems bugged, needs only one frame to reach maximum movement deviation...)

RUS:
turn settle time: 1s
move settle time: 4s

In my opinion, 3 burst is only effective for engaging one target at a time. Your rate of fire only allows you to do so. However with a full automatic. You can just hold the trigger and slice a entire squad. I've done it lots before but you can also hold down the trigger fire more than enough rounds and empty your magazine, then when you actually needed those rounds your killed while reloading. Its a trade off. There is never a perfect weapon for use. But rather how you use the weapon.

Nice necro, why would you post in a thread so old?

Cuz he can.

L4gi wrote:Nice necro, why would you post in a thread so old?

It's not that old

L4gi wrote:Nice necro, why would you post in a thread so old?

Because he has an opinion on the matter and he'd like to share it?

I personally almost never use 3 round burst, even in CQB, because the accuracy just suck I feel like full auto is way better than 3 round burst ^^

It would be a tough sell trying to get full auto implemented into pr, however I have to say that I thoroughly enjoy the AR strapped to my hip when clearing a floor in a T-building "yeah I`ve got mo bullets"

Beyond that I tend to stick to single shot beyond 10 meters to conserve ammo and concentrate on accuracy.

- sent using Tapatalk HD

It's very ping dependent anyway i've noticed. I'd probably rather have a ping of 20 and single shot, than a ping of 60 and full auto. CQB in PR reminds me of the Knife in vBF2. If you have a good ping you can get loads of kills in one go, however with a poor one it's hard to get even a sitting target.

That could also explain some of the differences of opinion I think.

60 ping and full auto any day.