AP vs. ATGM

[tankninja1]

ATGMs take a lot of the fun out of armored combat. ATGM hits to the side/rear/top kill most tanks in one shot, ATGM hits to frontal armor usually do so much damage that they might as well kill the tank they hit. This is made more frustrating by the fact that tank without ATGMs have to fire 3-4 AP shells at their opponents to kill them.

For example Leo 2 vs. T-90 the T-90 has a massive advantage because the ATGM will either disable the turret, track, or kill the Leo 2 with one shot. The Leo 2 meanwhile has to get at least 2 shots, usually 3, into the T-90 before the possibility that the T-90 will be tracked or disabled, or killed.

ATGMs on some APCs can be massively overpowering, like the BMP-2M with the 4 TOWs. Because there is no lengthy reload time, like a tank, BMP-3, BMP-2 RU version, the BMP-2M is basically a spandrel with an additional 30mm cannon. The BMP-2m can also have the TOWs armed while moving so all it has to do is stop and shoot.

Meanwhile the Bradly and Puma have to sit still for a lifetime before the TOWs can be fired, and if the driver has to make an emergency move then the gunner is locked for additional time after the driver stops again.

[ComradeHX]

If you use BluFor ATGM APC correctly(as in camping like everyone else) then the delay isn't an issue.
It's realistic too.

Also, the older ATGM in Soviet vehicles were nerfed so it takes 2 shots to kill MBT from front.

ATGM is great and it's absolutely devastating when used effectively.

However, they fly comparatively slowly(obviously) and does poorly against fast moving targets(such as choppers), and some would spin so they are dodgy against smaller targets.

BMP-2M is an awesome vehicle in the right hands because it's not just a Spandrel BRDM(which also cannot fire on the move), it has 30mm APDS/HE, 40mm grenades(a lot of people never realized it exists, using this = BMP-2M never overheats), and ATGM(which isn't the same as the one on T-90, btw, it does not do serious enough damage from front of MBT and spins).

[sweedensniiperr]

I'm no expert but surely you would have to get out of the tank to reload the atgm if there isn't a second one.

Why not make atgms just have 0 reloads so that you would have to go back to base to reload them. Tanks and APCs with atgms still would have an advantage.

[fecht_niko]

Having ATGMs on APCs is fine because they can still be one shot by tanks, HATs and sometimes LATs.
The gameplay only suffers from ATGM tanks vs normal tanks because you kill almost always with only 1 shot, even to front amour.

Tank battles would be much more fun if you would change it to:

-4 AP rounds to the front to kill a tank (tracked by 3)
-3 AP rounds to the side (tracked by 2)
-2 AP rounds to the back (tracked by 1)

-2 ATGM rounds to the front (tracked by 1 ATGM + 1 AP)
-1 ATGM + 1 AP round to the side (tracked by 1 ATGM)
-1 ATGM to the back

[crazygamelover]

Meh, I don't see any problem with the current system. From my experiences, it only takes two shots to kill a tank with an AP shell, and occasionally two shots to kill an APC. Who cares if ATGMs are so deadly, it's called "asymmetrical warfare" (or is that just a PR euphemism for "West is best"?)

[Jacksonez__]

I'm no expert but surely you would have to get out of the tank to reload the atgm if there isn't a second one.

Why not make atgms just have 0 reloads so that you would have to go back to base to reload them. Tanks and APCs with atgms still would have an advantage.

No. T-90 fires atgm from turret barrel (can be loaded from inside). To balance atgm-ap, i think that T-62/72/90 tanks should have weak point that can cause catastrophical cook-off effect because of auto-loader. Most NATO tanks use manual loader that eliminates / decreases the chances of catastrophical cook-off that kills the crew.

I can check for sources but I am on mobile device now, will check later

edit: Okay so most NATO tanks have four crewman: driver, gunner, commander, loader. So called eastern tanks (=ex-soviet, Russia etc.) have three crewmen, since those tanks have auto loader.

The auto loader stores shells in carousel around the turret, so even one shell hit can cause cook off effect. Though, with auto loader the tank can have lower profile so it is harder to hit. Western tanks store ammo in fire-proof compartment, so crew has a lot better chances to survive if the tank is hit in ammo compartment, unlike eastern models.

this is how autoloader stores ammo


this is how manual loader stores ammo



so what I am suggesting, eastern tanks (generally) should have much higher chances of getting one-hit killed when shell hits the turret.

[ComradeHX]

so what I am suggesting, eastern tanks (generally) should have much higher chances of getting one-hit killed when shell hits the turret.

There already is a weakspot, it's the "neck" between turret and hull.

[sweedensniiperr]

No. T-90 fires atgm from turret barrel (can be loaded from inside). [/B]

So t-90 only one then?

The rest can have one loadout for atgms then need to go back for re-arm.

EDIT: I really need to do my homework.. So the vehicles that can't rearm from the inside shouldn't be able to "reload". How about that then? I see no harm in it. More realism and all.

[Jacksonez__]

So t-90 only one then?

The rest can have one loadout for atgms then need to go back for re-arm.

As far as I know most ATGM-equipped tanks fire it from the turret barrel. BMP-1 fires it from above the turret (ATGM is carried by railing) , but I've seen from some old documentaries, that the ATGM pops from inside the turret, suggesting it also can be re-armed from inside

In I recall correct, BMP-2M (version with ATGM) has only 1x ATGM launcher on its side, so that would have to be reloaded from outside after each shot.

e: well I remembered wrong, actually it has at least 4x atgm tubes attached to it.



Some vehicles are over powered. It was like Friday when we engaged T-90 with Leopard. Got one solid hit on it's left side, the T-90 fell back with sparks coming. My friend shot again in the hull, hit. He shot third time in the hull, hit again. Then the T-90 loaded ATGM and one-shotted us. In total, we shot three confirmed hits. My friend claims he hit it four times. The T-90 only got one ATGM shot at us and we are done.

That's when I kinda raged.

[Mineral]

I think in PR the Type98 (and new ztz99), BMP3 and T90 have barrel launched atgms, all others are 'outside'.

[Jacksonez__]

I think in PR the Type98 (and new ztz99), BMP3 and T90 have barrel launched atgms, all others are 'outside'.

Have a look at 1:24. You can see a crewman arm there, pushing the ATGM outside. So it can be reloaded from inside In theory, no limits for BMP-1



But it does not matter. BMP-2M has four external tubes, so it has four individual ATGMs. No need to reload the tube after each shot. Bradley and Puma also have external tubes outside.

Puma and Bradley can shoot two ATGMs in short period of time. BMP-3 ATGM range is limited, does not have effect in short range, or this is what I think? Might have been bad hitbox though because the ATGM didn't go off at impact. BMP-2M has pretty moderate reload time for ATGM.

[Mats391]

BMP-2M only has 4 missile and can only reload at supply depot. It also has 10sec delay between shots.
Bradley and Puma can reload from inside. Fold in the launcher and you can access it to reload.
BMP-3 ATGM is also barrel fired and can be reloaded from inside. It is also pretty strong, so it must be you that is bad with it
We have a lot of vehicles that require to leave the vehicle for reload. Most AA and AT vehicles require this. This cannot be represented in BF2, so only option is to increase reload time to simulate it.

[Navo]

Isn't this literally the only area Opfor usually has an advantage vs Blufor?

[ComradeHX]

Isn't this literally the only area Opfor usually has an advantage vs Blufor?

Sometimes Opfor also gets better autocannons or two-round alternate LAT kit.

[camo]

There already is a weakspot, it's the "neck" between turret and hull.

Could be expanded to the coax firing port as well as the drivers periscope as they are generally the traditional weak spots for russian tanks.


Especially the drivers hatch, 279mm ke protection and 330 heat protection, even some versions of the m72 law can penetrate that (on paper at least).

[ComradeHX]

Could be expanded to the coax firing port as well as the drivers periscope as they are generally the traditional weak spots for russian tanks.


Especially the drivers hatch, 279mm ke protection and 330 heat protection, even some versions of the m72 law can penetrate that (on paper at least).

Then we can expand M1A2 weakspot to the driver's hatch and massive shottrap under turret as well.

[camo]

Yes i think so too.
I don't have as big "west is best" mentality as you think i do comrade. Chill it a bit

[viirusiiseli]

BMP-2M... ...and ATGM(which isn't the same as the one on T-90, btw, it does not do serious enough damage from front of MBT and spins).

No, no, no. Gets a tank burning from frontal hit. Just like all the other ATGMs. Malyutka is the only ATGM I've fired at a tank without getting it burning/blowing up. Don't lie.

Regarding the OP, yes, ATGMs are really good. You know what you're going against though, so you should act accordingly. Find a place where most of your hull is behind cover and play defensive etc etc. The only real problem is the AP shells seem to be buggy in PR, they don't damage tanks with every round. You're supposed to be able to kill a tank with 2 AP shells at the moment but a lot of the rounds that are fired just don't register any damage. Fix that and AP only tanks are more balanced again.

[Frontliner]

I'm fine with ATGMs killing a tank outright as long as it's side or rear armour, however most, if not all, modern tanks have means of protection against reactive warheads, and the game isn't simulating this at all atm. Having the ability to survive an ATGM hit on frontal armour on MBTs would help to even the odds a bit when it's ATGM tanks vs. no ATGM tanks.

[Jacksonez__]

I'm fine with ATGMs killing a tank outright as long as it's side or rear armour, however most, if not all, modern tanks have means of protection against reactive warheads, and the game isn't simulating this at all atm. Having the ability to survive an ATGM hit on frontal armour on MBTs would help to even the odds a bit when it's ATGM tanks vs. no ATGM tanks.

This game/mod does not also simulate delicate optical devices outside of the tank. You shoot LAT at them, those optics are gone for good and the tank becomes pretty damn blind to its surroundings.

Modern ATGM can penetrate pretty much every tank armor. If it doesn't penetrate, the crew will suffer very badly though (sound, explosion shockwave etc)