Project Reality Forums

The US LAT kit can destroy a BTR or a MTLB with one hit in the front. A BMP-3 with one hit in the side. In my opinion its to overpowerd because every squad can select a LAT kit in the spawn menu. Is that designated?, because I can remember that in 0.981 a LAT kit wasn't able to kill a BTR with one shot in the front.

regards atom

The BTR and MTLB are some of the least armored APCs in the game, both can be killed by .50cal fire and the MTLB can be killed with large amounts of infantry fire, 5.56 or 7.62. The BMP 3 should take more than one hit to kill from the side, that may be a bug, lucky hit, or the BMP was previously damaged.

Also what LAT kit the LAW or the AT4?

Was this in Co-op or online?

Also for the BTR getting kill in one shot to the front did the crew jump out before it died? Sometimes vehicle health will decrease until the vehicle dies if no crew is in it.

'atom9[CH wrote:;2002631']The US LAT kit can destroy a BTR or a MTLB with one hit in the front. A BMP-3 with one hit in the side. In my opinion its to overpowerd because every squad can select a LAT kit in the spawn menu. Is that designated?, because I can remember that in 0.981 a LAT kit wasn't able to kill a BTR with one shot in the front.

regards atom

The armor of a BTR is about 1cm thick. What do you expect?

The AT4 is a relative new weapon and can pierce through it.
The LAW and the other hand is a bit older and it takes 2 rockets to kill a BTR (that's why you get two rockets if you choose the LAW LAT kit)

Careless wrote:The LAW and the other hand is a bit older and it takes 2 rockets to kill a BTR (that's why you get two rockets if you choose the LAW LAT kit)

That and the M72 LAW is only weighs 2.5kg to the AT4's 6.7kg and from what I understand its quite common for two to be carried into combat now due to its light weight in r/l.

You could easily carry 5 laws ingame.
Or 2 AT-4
That would make 12,5 kilos or 13,4 kilos.
The german LAT kit the Panzerfaust 3 weights 12,9 kilos alone.

Can we get double damage for the Panzerfaust 3 please :-D .

It should come as no surprise that the AT-4 can destroy most soviet-era APCs, after all it can more than sufficiently penetrate nearly all of them from almost all angles even the BMP-3 lacks sufficient protection to withstand an AT-4, or most other LAT weapons for that matter. Obviously merely penetrating the vehicle is not enough to ensure its total destruction and unless it happens to ignite the ammunition or fuel tanks (which is very unlikely) than the vehicle is more likely to be disabled either due to the destruction or damage of the engine, tracks or injury and death of crew members.

This highlights one of the BF2 engines biggest limitations which is its inability to accurately simulate this in game. Im assuming for this reason two hits are usually required with LAT weapons against amour that would easily be penetrated and find it odd that soviet APCs don't get the same treatment, for example the RPG-7 is more then capable of penetrating the LAV-25 yet it still gets the courtesy of enduring about two of them in game, why isn't the same logic carried over to BMPs and such?

MTLB armor is tinfoil lol. No wonder LAT can destroy it easily.

waldov wrote: . Im assuming for this reason two hits are usually required with LAT weapons against amour that would easily be penetrated and find it odd that soviet APCs don't get the same treatment, for example the RPG-7 is more then capable of penetrating the LAV-25 yet it still gets the courtesy of enduring about two of them in game, why isn't the same logic carried over to BMPs and such?

Maybe because of the sloped armor?

Rolling_Ruedo wrote:Maybe because of the sloped armor?

Wrong, it's because MURICA! Power of freedom shields the crewmen inside.

It's for balance reasons because otherwise the blufor whores (so 90% of the playaerbase) would be whining about it.

Brainlaag wrote:Wrong, it's because MURICA! Power of freedom shields the crewmen inside.

It's for balance reasons because otherwise the blufor whores (so 90% of the playaerbase) would be whining about it.

still ridiculous, BMP2 should have a good frontal armor because really slope but hes armor is also paper and take a masive damage from .50s, and btr also is more sloped than lav and i also experienced i shoot a Russian hat at the top of the LAV and hes run away with hes wheels broken an i cold have a time to reload because he was far.

LAV25s aren't as easy to balance ingame because they are vbf2 models, which limits how detailed their damage models are. PR-made-APCs feature proper 'top, side, front, et cetera' damage models, the LAV25 does not.

It's not because of the AT-4, blame crappy apc's such as MTLB a.K.a Metal coffin.

'KillJoy[Fr wrote:;2003138']It's not because of the AT-4, blame crappy apc's such as MTLB a.K.a Metal coffin.

MTLB are traktors.
If you expect them to perform like BTR-80 then you are going to have a bad time.

For my All "heavy Apc" should have the same armor because Bf2 engine cant simulate armor penetration so by trying to make it more realistic you make it even worst. IRL Rpg-7 can penetrate any STANAG 4569 level 4 Apc Without any problem.

And for all the "nato whores" that think that the rest of the world can't compete with nato technologies they should watch some ANNA NEWS videos where you can see Bmp surving Direct IED and RPG hits

IED hit

LiveLeak.com - ANNA -Northward Attack pt. 4 Massive BMP-2 Usage Nice Footage Bmp taking a Rpg and surving

And there lot more to see ( especialy one hit where the Bmp lose his track and manage to survive ) im too lazy to find all of them.

Penetration Doesn't mean Kill in real life , But PR is a Game so all apc should Die after 2 LAT in the back and 3 In the front. And pls don't start with the weight Factor or any others physical limitation that can't be reproduced in game PLS !

And if you want a Simulation feel Free to Play Some simulations :

STEELBEASTS.COM - HOME
DCS: Combined Arms

....

And if MTLBS are not "IFV" in the game with do we need a crewman kit for them ? if they are just "russian jeeps"

You're comparing BMPs and their max 33mm of armour with MT-LBs and their max 14mm of armour.

2 LAT shots to the rear should not be a requirement to take out the MT-LB, that would be terrible for gameplay and not realistic at the same time.

Also, MT-LBs have always been classified as APCs in PR, not as IFV.

Prevtzer wrote:You're comparing BMPs and their max 33mm of armour with MT-LBs and their max 14mm of armour.

For me Mtlb , french VAB , m113 should be considered as Armored jeep like the HMMWV since they have the same purpose and same level of protection and they should be usable without Crewman kits they should all die from 1 Rpg

Slightly off-topic but what annoys me most is that vehicles blow up, always. Wouldn't it be much better to have a big "disabled/tracked/whatever" health bar before the vehicle actually blows up and have a random variable that determines if it sometimes instantly explodes?

Nothing worst than seeing a vehicle blow up from 50. cal fire -.-

'[F|H wrote:Zackyx;2004467']For me Mtlb , french VAB , m113 should be considered as Armored jeep like the HMMWV since they have the same purpose and same level of protection and they should be usable without Crewman kits they should all die from 1 Rpg

Good thing you're not a DEV...

Prevtzer wrote:Good thing you're not a DEV...

Then I guess you like broken stuff

Brainlaag wrote:Slightly off-topic but what annoys me most is that vehicles blow up, always. Wouldn't it be much better to have a big "disabled/tracked/whatever" health bar before the vehicle actually blows up and have a random variable that determines if it sometimes instantly explodes?

Nothing worst than seeing a vehicle blow up from 50. cal fire -.-

I think this is the underlying problem here, the majority of PRs APCs NATO or otherwise are for the most part equally vulnerable to LAT weapons and such the only difference in real life is that if your Russian BTR gets shredded by an RPG and your spall liner, automatic fire fighting system equipped LAV-25 gets penetrated by an RPG its obvious who has a better chance of walking out alive.

PR is unable to reflect this unfortunately and instead in either case the vehicle's burst into a Hollywood explosion killing everyone on board, but I guess the closest PR can get to representing this is by making the modern NATO vehicles stronger. So while the way it is now is far from perfect it is the most realistic as it can be.

Sent from my B1-710 using Tapatalk