Project Reality Forums

Jacksonez__ wrote:Panzerfaust 3 has the distance scale thing, but the odds to use it properly on the battlefield conditions are darn low. (you need to aim at vehicle that is sideways as far as I know, then the scale works - usually). Or you can try estimating the distance, usually missing the shot. If I am using the German HAT, I will always sneak as close as I can get to the armor (maybe 30-50m) and then fire

German HAT is worse than the Russian RPG-7 tandem warhead in my opinion. Russia's HAT is max. 200m but at least they get two shots and the sight is very simple (backup sights). I think that the German HAT also has higher deviation settle time than the RPG-7 has.

Isn't the smaller part on top for aiming at tank's front/rear?

Panzerfaust 3 simply flies straighter, and faster.

I was under the impression(from changelog) that all unguided HAT has been set to LAT deviation/settletime.

So far, RPG-7 is working as intended; since it covers the range that would be considered too close for SPG-9 and some ATGM. Can't wait until RPG-29 is done so Russia can actually have a functional HAT on 4km maps.

PF3 is fine too(it could use active rangefinder if someone just remodels it), not to mention germans get magnifying scope + reddot for their rifle.

Jacksonez__ wrote:Give the German HAT kit 2x Panzerfaust (not good idea since it is heavy AF, like 13 kg a shot, two would be 26 kg + additional equipment, gotta be super soldier for that) OR give it the laser rangefinder.

It was my understanding that only the bunker defeating/anti personnel munition was 13kg, the antiarmor was significantly lighter.

mat552 wrote:It was my understanding that only the bunker defeating/anti personnel munition was 13kg, the antiarmor was significantly lighter.

HAT would be the tandem-hollowcharge warhead, which would be about the same weight as the bunker-busting(thermobaric?) warhead.

Afaik the tandem charge warhead spare round is 13,3kg, whereas the basic shaped charge warhead is 12.9 kg.

Now an additional 13,3kg to carry around is quite a lot (might as well carry an additional loaded MG3), but given the nature of the PzF3 in PR it might be a neat idea giving the HAT gunner a second shot, because out of all HAT kits in the game I think it's the hardest to use, especially when you consider how rarely these are actually used.

Hurricane wrote: because out of all HAT kits in the game I think it's the hardest to use, especially when you consider how rarely these are actually used.

The most difficult to use HAT is the RPG-7 with tandem warhead.

It already has two shots.

Honestly, I would give the LAT Pzf the ability to shred or disable BTR-80s and BMPs frontally, and keep the HAT at where it is at. The PzF 3 is a nice tradeoff, having to account for its drop but also dealing lots of damage when you hit would differentiate it from the RPG-7VR which has the ability to reload, but even worse range and less damage. Right now the LAT is just a harder to use AT-4.

X-Alt

X-Alt wrote:Honestly, I would give the LAT Pzf the ability to shred or disable BTR-80s and BMPs frontally, and keep the HAT at where it is at. The PzF 3 is a nice tradeoff, having to account for its drop but also dealing lots of damage when you hit would differentiate it from the RPG-7VR which has the ability to reload, but even worse range and less damage. Right now the LAT is just a harder to use AT-4.

X-Alt

You don't need to balance PZ-3 against AT-4, they are never used on opposite sides.
Not to mention German HAT kit has dual optics.

Updated German AA and AT kit to use G36 instead of MP7.

As far as i know, the PZF3 is used like a disposable launcher most of the time. It can be reloaded, but that is usually only done in base. You need some special stuff to do it and soldiers dont carry that around. Feel free to prove me wrong
Also we have no reload animation for it

The "tube"is disposable, the firing unit with the sight isn't. After firing it you detach the firing unit from the empty round and either put it away (it's foldable and pretty compact) or load another round.

Hurricane wrote:The "tube"is disposable, the firing unit with the sight isn't. After firing it you detach the firing unit from the empty round and either put it away (it's foldable and pretty compact) or load another round.

Yea and the tube is something like 10+kg. I dont see how/why anyone would carry two of those if you can have someone else carry the second one (ammobag in game).

Why dont give the Germans the RGW 90 LRMP as alternativ HAT?


Photos of the German military Panzerfaust RGW 90 AS/HH/LRMP : theBRIGADE
Its almost the same as the Matador-MP with another sight.

According to wikipedia the Bundeswehr only got the RGW90 AS (Anti Stucture)

But I think this is not up-to-date, and there are some pictures where german soldiers use different models of the RGW 90.

Technical Data:
Caliber 90 mm
Weight (with fire control unit) 8.9 kg (11 kg)
Length 0.99 m
Effective range 20 m to 1200 m

The shoulder launched weapon is effectively used against soft targets, light armored vehicles, field fortifications and targets behind cover.

RGW 90 LRMP - Dynamit Nobel Defence

This is what bothers me. Its for soft targets and light armored vehicles. But the Matador MP which the IDF uses as HAT in PR is also a multi-purpose weapon

MATADOR-MP
Multi-purpose weapon with a warhead effective against a wide variety of ground targets, from light armoured vehicles to fortified positions and urban walls.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MATADOR

I think is the RGW 90 is a good alternativ to the to the "quite bad" PzF 3 Tandem.
But I would keep the PzF 3, with an extra shot.
And insert the RGW 90 as alternative to the PzF 3.

There is also a LAT version the RGW 60. Which also could be a alternativ.

Someone should just model it first.. French could have APILAS also as their alt-HAT kit.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/APILAS

Teewurst wrote:Why dont give the Germans the RGW 90 LRMP as alternativ HAT?


Photos of the German military Panzerfaust RGW 90 AS/HH/LRMP : theBRIGADE
Its almost the same as the Matador-MP with another sight.

According to wikipedia the Bundeswehr only got the RGW90 AS (Anti Stucture)

But I think this is not up-to-date, and there are some pictures where german soldiers use different models of the RGW 90.





This is what bothers me. Its for soft targets and light armored vehicles. But the Matador MP which the IDF uses as HAT in PR is also a multi-purpose weapon



I think is the RGW 90 is a good alternativ to the to the "quite bad" PzF 3 Tandem.
But I would keep the PzF 3, with an extra shot.
And insert the RGW 90 as alternative to the PzF 3.

There is also a LAT version the RGW 60. Which also could be a alternativ.

We have a MATADOR model, why not add it?

X-Alt wrote:We have a MATADOR model, why not add it?

Thats the point we already have a model. You just have to rename it and then you have a alternative HAT.

We thought about giving the Germans the RGW90, but not as AT
Can anyone confirm the penetration of the PZF3 HEAT? We had a discussion about it and different sources claim totally different values. The Bundewehr claims it to have a penetration of >700mm (source, german) and world.guns.ru only lists it at 400mm (source, english)

http://www.rk-wisserland.de/048_12_OrgBefehl.pdf

On page 12 it also claims 700mm penetration.

This and the website of the german heer, both claim about 700mm penetration.
And I would say this should be right, why would the german army claim that they have more or less penetration on their own weapon.

But you thought about giving the German the RGW 90 but not as AT?
Did you thought about giving it to the grenadier? Because the RGW 90AS is mostly used against infantry and walls?

Teewurst wrote:http://www.rk-wisserland.de/048_12_OrgBefehl.pdf

On page 12 it also claims 700mm penetration.

This and the website of the german heer, both claim about 700mm penetration.
And I would say this should be right, why would the german army claim that they have more or less penetration on their own weapon.

But you thought about giving the German the RGW 90 but not as AT?
Did you thought about giving it to the grenadier? Because the RGW 90AS is mostly used against infantry and walls?

Yea, why should an army lie to make it look more powerful? I see no reason to do it, especially considering the bad reputation of Bundeswehr equipment

'[R-DEV wrote:Mats391;2085057']We thought about giving the Germans the RGW90, but not as AT
Can anyone confirm the penetration of the PZF3 HEAT? We had a discussion about it and different sources claim totally different values. The Bundewehr claims it to have a penetration of >700mm (source, german) and world.guns.ru only lists it at 400mm (source, english)

If you're unsure which value to take, just consider the caliber and weight of the warhead. The warhead of the Pzf3 alone is heavier than some LATs. Just to give you some pointers.

The Pzf3 even without dual purpose is stronger than the Matador, where's the point in forsaking one for the other? The only thing I would request is giving the German ALT HAT the Dynarange sighting system(with MP7 as primary weapon for the ALT HAT - to compensate for a better AT weapon) used by the Matador. Trying to hit anything with the Pzf is a pain in the butt, even more so on maps like Silent Eagle.