Project Reality Forums

i was making an thread about the AT4 on oftopic.. than i thought this should belong to suggestions
---------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YrmAaG6lwS0[/youtube]


As you can see,, these AT4's are much stronger than the PR's AT4's
So i suggested make them more powerfull , like killing all infantry in an apc
Movie can be used as some information

What! is the AT4 swedish?

There's something called 'balance'... if one L-AT would be enough to take down an APC, the number of kits would have to be reduced.

this is all about reality right ???
Balance is a B¡tch
and i think that at4 must be used much more..
maybe as normal kit,, in maps like kashan
(even for support)

I have another video about AT-4
This should also be implemented in PR
(JOKE)

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=18f_1191580020

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lm0azEG0CPY[/youtube]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7IH5nFAi16E[/youtube]

It's a Saab! The backblast doesn't seem to be really big in this video seeing how the fire it from inside a house and all.

Ragni<RangersPL> wrote:I have another video about AT-4
This should also be implemented in PR
(JOKE)

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=18f_1191580020

YES!! should be impleted if you shoot without aiming

arjan wrote:this is all about reality right ???
Balance is a B¡tch

Yes, but it's still a game, and games have to be balanced.

and i think that at4 must be used much more..
maybe as normal kit,, in maps like kashan
(even for support)

Personally I hate using anti-tank weaponry as anti-infantry weapons, if that's what you mean with 'support'.
But I think L-AT kits are not used on big maps like Kashan, because they are short/medium ranged weapons which can only take out light armoured vehicles. And since Kashan has more tanks then apc's...

I meant the support kit

Raymond.Reiloff wrote:What! is the AT4 swedish?

Yep, it's made by Bofors as you can see. But the export version (AT4) and the swedish version (Pskott m/86) are a little bit different.

Is having 5 (it is 5 right?) on top of 2 heavy ATs for every 32 players that realistic anyway?

agree about the balance thing ,BUT NOT MIRROR BALANCE, isn't this a reality game ???

AT4 has a better penetration power than the pf89 (and equal to the rpg26) .

and BTW all the LAT(except the pf89) ingame are capable of take out any APC (btr90,lav25 and type-zomething ) with one shot.

well, if you want balance we can make something like this:

US LAT: 1 at4(+-10 kg) w/o optics
PLA LAT: 2 pf89(+-6 kg) with optics (the pf89 weigh less than the at4)
MEC LAT: 1 rpg26 with out optics

the reason is that both , at4 and rpg have more penetration power than the pf89.

Balance....shalance. With all this talk of reality in (eh hem) Project REALITY, the emphasis should be on reality wherever possible. After seeing this and a few other vids regarding the use of anti-tank weapons, I and I'm sure a few other people feel cheated.

AnRK wrote:Is having 5 (it is 5 right?) on top of 2 heavy ATs for every 32 players that realistic anyway?

Actually, yes. AT4 (US M136 / UK ILAW) and other single-shot, disposable light anti-armor weapons are usually issued, depending on mission factors, to at least one rifleman in every four-man fire team. Medium anti-tank weapons like the Javelin are found in a platoon weapons squad or are attached to a platoon from a company or battalion anti-tank section, usually two per rifle platoon.

BTW what warhead is portrayed in PR, Is it the HEAT or HP (High penetration)?

[R-DEV]Eddie Baker wrote:Actually, yes. AT4 (US M136 / UK ILAW) and other single-shot, disposable light anti-armor weapons are usually issued, depending on mission factors, to at least one rifleman in every four-man fire team. Medium anti-tank weapons like the Javelin are found in a platoon weapons squad or are attached to a platoon from a company or battalion anti-tank section, usually two per rifle platoon.

Cool, was just wondering, seems like alot of ballache, but I guess if they've got them down to 10 or less kilograms it can't be that bad.

I'm really not too bothered about the balance though, I'd prefer it myself if things like these started to make notable differences between armies.

its not about engine,, its about balance xD