Project Reality Forums

After firing numerous rockets of all shapes and sizes in situations they're perhaps not specialized for, I've come to the irreversible conclusion that all LAT weapons (and specifically the RPG-7 as it's the most utilized in this role) are massively, massively underperforming against infantry targets. Yes, LAT are most effective against light armored targets like APCs, but it's an undeniable fact of war that these are frequently utilized for anti-infantry engagements, specifically from unconventional forces (which is why I specifically call out the RPG-7).

On more than a few separate occasions, I've fired the PG-7VM warhead into the dirt in front of an enemy, detonating within 2m of them (and on one occasion literally a few feet, as the guy literally bunny hopped over the explosion), and it doesn't even incapacitate them. Not even nearly. And having been on the receiving end of a few hits myself, I can tell you it narry even wounds you; it's little more than being hit with a rifle round, bleeding out but not even near incapacitation. Now, before someone comes in here beating their chest pretending to be experts on small arms (as all of these discussions tend to go) simply because they read the Wikipedia article on shaped charges and realize they're best utilized against armored vehicles, let it be known that in spite of the anti-tank focus of a PG-7VM round (and most other rockets of similar dimensions), it is still notorious for being a capable anti-infantry munition. Not as much as specialized fragmentation rounds, mind you, but when an 85mm HEAT round goes off, the sheer concussive force alone is easily enough to compete with the average offensive hand grenade in its potency and lethality radius.

The misconception people seem to have is that explosive lethality = amount of shrapnel, which is simply untrue. In fact, many hand grenades don't even utilize shrapnel. Take the German WWII vintage "potato masher" Model 34 grenade, they use a primarily concussive charge (although optional fragmentation sleeves were designed later).

Now I'm not saying an RPG-7 should be clearing out entire squads on a solid miss, but certainly incapacitating any infantry within a few meters of detonation would be an acceptable amount? The Insurgents have enough odds going against them, they don't need unrealistic nerfs to their only viable/wildly available long-range explosive weapon.

I agree with everything said here, except where you submit that LAT weapons are more effective now. More accurate? Perhaps. But I have yet to see any LAT weapon (excepting the LAW, haven't seen or used that one yet) take down any armored vehicle in 1.0, even on a solid rear-aspect hit. I even witnessed a Namir take a LAT and HAT hit (Hamas RPGs) to the side armor, and drive away with light smoke.

I didn't say more, I said most. As in, that's their primary role.

You also need a direct hit a player with guided HAT (sraw/eryx) to kill it. 'cause 2.5kg of explosives isn't enough

Yes, the LAT's are underperforming when it comes to taking out inf, the DEV's did this intentionally a few versions back. I for one wouldn't mind seeing it get a slight buff.

Problem is that if they buff it to much it will get spammed everywhere in fire fights given the ammo is around. Then again that could result in a larger need for better support units, giving people that like to do that more stuff to do.

I don't see it being spammed in firefights, especially med+ distance ones. With the 1.0 changes to deviation, it's simply too hard to even aim and fire a LAT at infantry before being mowed down, and LATs themselves consume ammo bags in a jiffy. You'll find that if you've so much as spent a couple mags or used your patch, and then try to get LAT ammo off an ammo bag, it'll disappear before you get a single round.

Not to mention, many LATs in the game get a lot of their utility and usefulness via their anti-infantry potential. Obviously RPG-7s in the hands of insurgents spring most immediately to mind, but even the LAW used by many other factions is really only useful to grab over something like an AT4 because you can carry multiple tubes, which is a drawback if you're trying to kill AFVs (one shot is likely all you'll get before they return fire) but a bonus if you're trying to take out infantry in buildings.

This is why the US Marines started bringing LAWs out of storage in the first place: they could carry 2 LAWs for every 1 AT4 in Iraq/Afghanistan, and because they were only using the launchers on fortifications and buildings, they opted for the less-potent AT-wise, but more potent (for its size/weight) AP/AF-wise, LAW.

Walmarx wrote: I even witnessed a Namir take a LAT and HAT hit (Hamas RPGs) to the side armor, and drive away with light smoke.

Namer has the armour of a tank thus lats do nothing, pretty sure it requires a good shot to tracks/rear to make it tracked/kill it

After shooting BTR-80 on side with AT-4 and it barely smoked, more than one time while I was unfortunate enough to not be able to switch to the other team, I just take HAT for even APC if available now.

Either 2 ammo LAT or nothing; since one shot that does not kill simply piss off the apc.

Yeah, i had to rear shot a bmp twice to kill it with a lat. From about ten meters away.

Thanks for the feedback.

For the next version LATs got slighty buffed vs Infantry and Light Armour. Most likely, "Medium" APCs won't blow up instantly by a LAT hitting the sides though, but it will be much easier to disable them by one shot there.

We will see how it plays out in the next patch.