Project Reality Forums

On Basra I enjoy playing insurgent, when I have a squad that sticks together.

Bobert08 wrote:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocket_propelled_grenade

You don't know everything.

It is referred to as a Rocket Propelled Grenade Launcher whether you like it or not.

Oh, and they do fragment, that's the HEAT part of HEAT rounds.

High Explosive = Fragment?

Oh I do know everything, stick around, you'll come to see the light. From your own reference:

American and British soldiers consistently call these weapons 'RPG's'; only journalists call them 'rocket-propelled grenades.'

Why? Because it's incorrect.

Re: Why not fire RPGs at tanks? Also from that wiki article:

Most modern main battle tanks (MBTs) are largely immune to hand-held unguided anti-tank weapons

The only reason they're used against tanks in PR is because RPGs aren't seen as being of any value at all. They're just too plentiful.

DirtyHarry88 wrote:Am I the only one who likes to switch back to Insurgents?

Nope, I do it too

yeh, wut wasteland sed!!!

JP*wasteland.soldier wrote:High Explosive = Fragment?

Oh I do know everything, stick around, you'll come to see the light. From your own reference:



Why? Because it's incorrect.

Re: Why not fire RPGs at tanks? Also from that wiki article:



The only reason they're used against tanks in PR is because RPGs aren't seen as being of any value at all. They're just too plentiful.

Or because, you know, that's what Insurgents use against actual tanks. Guess what, RPGs are plentiful.

RPGs kill unarmored ground troops daily, they explode, causing numerous rocks and fragments flying into our poor troops bodies. Something that is considered HIGHLY EXPLOSIVE means that much more force to dislodge and blow things at our troops. I'd like to think that constitutes fragments.

And how petty are you to jump all over me calling it a Rocket Propelled Grenade launcher? It's not a very far stretch to call it that. You wanna get on my case for making a common mistake? Go ahead, I guarantee it makes you look more like an *** than me.

You are no military expert, neither am I, the only difference is that I haven't claimed to know everything like you just did.

the point is, this is what the original poster said about RPG's.

"The number of Insurgents carrying RPGS in AL Basrah is ridiculous. They are a potential threat to air and ground targets. One RPG is most likely take out half a squad if they are all crouching on a wall and if you get a pack of these RPG weilding physo chopper serial killers, they are also gonna bring a cobra/blackhawk down."

my answer is one of the following..

You suck for not realizing this is what happens everday
Your Squad sucks for being that closely packed. An RPG has probably the same blast radius as a grenade (confirm?)
Your pilots suck for hovering that low or for that long, get better pilots.
Insurgents got some skilled RPG'ers on their team, so go insurgent.



Your squad should be wall stacked with an even interval just so stuff like that doesnt happen. If you were killed by a grenade, would you want to nerf the War Vet class?

This all leads back to the issue of people getting killed by other people that use the weapon effectivly and the only thing they can do is cry for a nerf so that they can even the playing field. Learn to play, and stop crying.

I'd just like the RPGs to have a bigger blast radius so they're not so effective in CQB, as in RL.

The thing is Bobert, you used the designation as "rocket propelled grenade" to support your point.

Bobert08 wrote:Exactly, in fact, it's called a "Rocket Propelled Grenade".

The point is to add rocket power to a fragmentation weapon. RPGs have a bit of piercing power, but they also fragment, making them a good anti infantry weapon.

While an RPG is not in fact "a grenade mounted on a rocket". It's a high explosive charge that causes a little bit of shrapnel by virtue of the fact that its a charge in a case. So in refuting your point, I had to refute that designation.

I'd hardly say I "jumped all over you"

And shame on you for perpetuating this myth. Shame, I say, shame!

That's called a joke. I also don't literally mean that I do in fact know everything. If you don't have a sense of humor, you're going to have a real rough time on any forum.

Re: "RPGs kill troops every day". Yes, they are used extensively in hit and run ambushes. But in a large scale pitched battle like what occurs in PR, they'd be smart enough to use the RPGs on the bunched up squads, hummers, and APCs running around everywhere, and not noob toob every single enemy soldier they see.

And p.s., no, I don't think insurgents fire RPGs at actual tanks. If they did, they'd be very dead insurgents.

Whatever, I just typed up a post pointing out the meaning of fragmentation, and how your joke was less of a sarcastic quip and more of a sign of an arrogant jerk. But I decided that was unnecessary, and off topic. So yes, I have a sense of humor. Your jokes just suck.

But hey, that's really not the point of this topic. So I'm going to do the better thing, and bring it back to the point.

RPGs are very plentiful in guerrilla forces, it's almost as versatile as the AK47. The fact of having quite a few insurgents running around with RPGs isn't a very far stretch.

If you want to talk about imbalance on Basrah, there are AA placement and A10 topics on this board as well. If you ask me, those are the real problems of Basrah.

I look in this topic and see more people actually AGAINST taking out the RPG class in .6, and yet the developers have made the decision with only a handful of forum members supporting it.

As for balance issues, the RPG is about the only thing that keeps the USMC out of the city, which is realistic. The actual USMC armor crews do not usually go into cities unless surrounded by infantry, in fear of being hit by a close RPG. RPGs are not a myth on the battlefield of Iraq, they are a severe and frequent threat, especially inside the cities. You think the Insurgents are winning a lot on Basrah now? Take out the RPGs and EVERY round will go to the USMC.

'[uBp wrote:Irish']the point is, this is what the original poster said about RPG's.

"The number of Insurgents carrying RPGS in AL Basrah is ridiculous. They are a potential threat to air and ground targets. One RPG is most likely take out half a squad if they are all crouching on a wall and if you get a pack of these RPG weilding physo chopper serial killers, they are also gonna bring a cobra/blackhawk down."

my answer is one of the following..

You suck for not realizing this is what happens everday
Your Squad sucks for being that closely packed. An RPG has probably the same blast radius as a grenade (confirm?)
Your pilots suck for hovering that low or for that long, get better pilots.
Insurgents got some skilled RPG'ers on their team, so go insurgent.



Your squad should be wall stacked with an even interval just so stuff like that doesnt happen. If you were killed by a grenade, would you want to nerf the War Vet class?

This all leads back to the issue of people getting killed by other people that use the weapon effectivly and the only thing they can do is cry for a nerf so that they can even the playing field. Learn to play, and stop crying.

Agree 10^3x

Bobert08 wrote:You think the Insurgents are winning a lot on Basrah now? Take out the RPGs and EVERY round will go to the USMC.

You forgot the IEDs and jihad cars...should we nerf that as well, so USMC will be protected like a little baby?

(Hell no)

DirtyHarry88 wrote:Am I the only one who likes to switch back to Insurgents?

I switch back almost every time. I love them. I also usually play the Insurgent class, not RPG whore.

lunchbox311 wrote:I switch back almost every time. I love them. I also usually play the Insurgent class, not RPG whore.

I see more people playing the special forces class.

Please discontinue the electronic prick-waving.

As to the casualty radius of the PG-7 HEAT rounds being equal to a grenade . . .

It is the secondary fragments from striking a structure or vehicle that are most dangerous to exposed infantry from a shaped charge/EFP round exploding, or if they are in a small room and it impacts inside, possibly overpressure. While it does have a self-destruct feature, no casualty radius for that explosion has been listed in a source I have been able to find.

Also consider that the most effective area for the OG-7 anti-personnel high explosive fragmentation round (which unlike a HEAT round is designed to produce approximately same-sized fragments over a wide area) is 150 square meters. An M67 fragmentation hand grenade has an effective radius of about 15 meters, for a circle area of approx 707 sq m.

Also with regard to the OG-7, we have considered adding different munition types for the reusable, multi-purpose launchers, and it has been suggested publicly before.

Okay, but I still don't think RPGs need to be limited unless you limit some of the USMC armor and airpower.

lunchbox311 wrote:I switch back almost every time. I love them. I also usually play the Insurgent class, not RPG whore.

Even though I dislike the G3 and wonder why the War Vet gets it, I do rather like the War Veteran Class.

How many RPG's would it take to destroy an Abrams tank? That Chobham armor is pretty damn strong. I can see them taking out an APC though.

Ringo876 wrote:How many RPG's would it take to destroy an Abrams tank? That Chobham armor is pretty damn strong. I can see them taking out an APC though.

I'm not quite sure an RPG round has ever actually destroyed an Abrams.

As far as I know, the worst an RPG has done to one of our Abrams is immobilize it because it didn't have any skirt armor and got hit in the tracks.

I guess for balance reasons, having an RPG immune Abrams tank would be a bit unfair.

well i still hate getting my tracks blown off after 2, because it's horribly retarded that noone cars to use the supply truck. That being said, i'm all for RPG's only being good against APC's, Infantry and Light Vehicles.

Gives the Suicide Bombers more of a job now