The AT is ANTITANK! not ANTIPERSONAL!

Post by **RikiRude** » 2006-05-27 12:31

dig the new sig mav

MrD · Post by **MrD** » 2006-05-27 13:53

you do not use a HEAT warhead for buildings! only for armour.

You will find that something like Milan will break through the first wall, then setoff on the second wall, the heat and power pentrating to hit anything in the second room.

All the people in the first room are going to get is a London Brick headache.

and they are far too expensive to use on infantry in buildings, same as tank shells, thats what FIBUA training is for, send the troops in as their munitions are worth less if they are skilled.

HEAT warheads are anti tank, they are High Explosive Anti Tank warheads. normal RPG's that explode on contact are for infantry and light to medium tanks, with some difference in the warhead charge. As i've mentioned before, a new warhead made it into the Iraq area and a Warrior was penetrated from the front with a single warhead, but not destroyed. It usually takes 5 or 6 rpg's at the front of a Warrior before it becomes disabled enough that it is time for the troops to leave!

the.ultimate.maverick · Post by **the.ultimate.maverick** » 2006-05-27 14:19

I didn't mention HEAT

Post by **A.J.Sawyer** » 2006-05-27 15:36

I can't wait untill the RPG-7 and/or Carl Gustav Launcher are included

MrD · Post by **MrD** » 2006-05-27 15:51

G.Drew wrote:u do realise that this would make the AT guy totally defenseless against other guys!
y not have HEAT and anti-tank missiles!

nope, you didn't mention them as two seperate items, Maverick, this guy did!

G.Drew · Post by **G.Drew** » 2006-05-27 17:08

lol 'this guy!'
but it would make sense to have an HE missile the blow the **** out of troops (this would come in handy for firing into they high houses!) and have the normal AT missiles (mybe less explosive power than now and have 2 to 3 times the explosive power in the HE missile)

Iasthai · Post by **Iasthai** » 2006-05-29 23:05

How about adding a minium activate time to the missiles? theres nothing i hate more than being missiled by someone whos only 10ft from me

Dylan · Post by **Dylan** » 2006-05-30 01:50

My solution... Buy a .45

twisted · Post by **twisted** » 2006-05-30 04:05

give the AT guy a personal defence weapon, likea m4, mp5 or pd90. good for up close work, and will prevent use of AT as a weapon vs infantry.

will also ensure that armour has a serious headache cause people will actually want to be AT more often.

CJones[31stMEU] · Post by **CJones[31stMEU]** » 2006-05-30 04:07

I ****ing hate it when they do that hell the 31st MEU doesn't allow it or grenade launchers in point blank range

TheEdge|Jinx · Post by **TheEdge|Jinx** » 2006-05-30 08:00

I was thinking again, uhm, would giving the AT Class, a rifle of some sort really take away the newbtewbing? I'm not so sure. Scenario: The AT guy is lying in position with the tewb ready, waiting for a tank, when you sneak up on him. He turns around and fires the rocket in your face. Even if he had a M249 in his pocket he'd be firing that rocket at you.

I think that most of the times you actually get shot with the rocket, it's merely a panic resort from the AT guys side. He know's he doesn't stand a chance if he where to take the time to switch to his sidearm, even if he isn't already dead when he's got it up, he still doesn't stand a chance.

I say, don't give the AT guys an Automatic Rifle. Just give him a better sidearm. Like a Desert Eagle. It's ridiculous that u can hit a guy with that darn pistol with so many shots before he goes down.

Post by **RikiRude** » 2006-05-30 08:10

That's not what I'm pining about, I know what its like to have your tube out as is and someone sneaks up on you, close range, i just assume i snuck up on the guy. my problem is seeing noobtubes being fired from 15m+ at soldiers.

Shining Arcanine · Post by **Shining Arcanine** » 2006-05-30 08:22

S.O.P wrote:You could just make the AT rocket ineffective against Infantry. Its realism at the same time as not being realistic. One would never fire, as mentioned above, an expensive, purpose-built missile at one infantryman but the game mechanics don't really allow that to happen.

Desert Combat for example, the Stinger in earlier betas was used as a Sniper rifle (much like the AT missile now) but in later versions caused no damage at all to Infantryman, only aerial vehicles.

How about giving AT kills zero points?

G.Drew · Post by **G.Drew** » 2006-05-30 12:10

Have AT missiles ineffective against inf. and have HE missiles ineffective against tanks, but leathel to inf.!

the.ultimate.maverick · Post by **the.ultimate.maverick** » 2006-05-30 12:31

Have HEDP - Dual Purpose, which are effective against light armor and anti personnel. And then HEAA - effective against armor.

Simple, effective.

[ZiiP]DarkJester · Post by **[ZiiP]DarkJester** » 2006-05-30 13:01

my 2 cents.

In BF2, there is code that causes players to die when they get hit in the head by a grenade. There's no explosion. -- Could this not be added to Rockets? I can't imagine that a rocket that is designed to detonate when it hits armor would detonate when it hits skin. - Therefore, it should maybe knockover (seriously wound) the infantry and continue past the target.

Maybe there should also be a "minimum arm time" for rockets, - like underslung grenades have in vBF2... does that exist IRL?

~WPN~callum247 · Post by **~WPN~callum247** » 2006-05-30 13:04

Well give him an SMG or rifle and he wont have to shoot rockets at you.

TheEdge|Jinx · Post by **TheEdge|Jinx** » 2006-05-30 13:36

~WPN~callum247 wrote:Well give him an SMG or rifle and he wont have to shoot rockets at you.

TheEdge|Jinx wrote:I was thinking again, uhm, would giving the AT Class, a rifle of some sort really take away the newbtewbing? I'm not so sure. Scenario: The AT guy is lying in position with the tewb ready, waiting for a tank, when you sneak up on him. He turns around and fires the rocket in your face. Even if he had a M249 in his pocket he'd be firing that rocket at you.

Totally agree with you [ZiiP]DarkJester. All those suggestions are great.

NiGHTWoLF · Post by **NiGHTWoLF** » 2006-05-30 13:44

'[ZiiP wrote:DarkJester']

Maybe there should also be a "minimum arm time" for rockets, - like underslung grenades have in vBF2... does that exist IRL?

The GL's EA put in vBF2 are still faulty, if your GL hit a enemy soldier the grenade would literaly stick to the guy or fall to the ground at his feet and still kill him. That prob still same here, the rocket would in effect stick the the soldier until it blew up. Another scenario is if a tank is next to you, the rocket would arm in time to hit the tank which is just making AT less useful. Giving them a gun will help sop noob tubing definoutly.

'TheEdge|Jinx' wrote: I was thinking again, uhm, would giving the AT Class, a rifle of some sort really take away the newbtewbing? I'm not so sure. Scenario: The AT guy is lying in position with the tewb ready, waiting for a tank, when you sneak up on him. He turns around and fires the rocket in your face. Even if he had a M249 in his pocket he'd be firing that rocket at you.

If the AT guy is in a squad surely no one would be able to sneak up on the AT.

Iasthai · Post by **Iasthai** » 2006-05-30 14:36

NiGHTWoLF wrote:The GL's EA put in vBF2 are still faulty, if your GL hit a enemy soldier the grenade would literaly stick to the guy or fall to the ground at his feet and still kill him. That prob still same here, the rocket would in effect stick the the soldier until it blew up. Another scenario is if a tank is next to you, the rocket would arm in time to hit the tank which is just making AT less useful. Giving them a gun will help sop noob tubing definoutly.

If the AT guy is in a squad surely no one would be able to sneak up on the AT.

Ok what about a "setup" time? if the AT is on the move, anything short of being in scope mode, he puts the launcher away and add a delay for geting it back out? i think that would encourage people to walk around with their pistol out instead, i dont get why everyone says its so bad cos' ive pistol whipped plenty of people with that thing