Project Reality Forums

How can 2 consecutive L.A.W rockets not destroy a t-62 from the side? and then even more so, for it to still have the capability to move, traverse its turret and fire?

A single RPG can penatrate outdated armour such as the t55-62, this is a relitively modern weapon in comparison and in reality would critically damage such targets with one shot.

good point brought up here

Jonny wrote:LAT rockets are anti-infantry, otherwise they would be stronger against tanks.

what the... ???

the current system could simulate possible ricochet shots
another thing thats implemented very well at RedOrchestra. But probably hardcoded deficiancy at BF2

if u fire a rocket at a like 45° on a tank armor plating chances that the rocket bounces off instat of penetrating it are pretty good - imho

Your logic defies me jonny
Yeah the AT4 or LAW80 should stop a tanks movement, but its only by chance that the mechanics of the tank stop working(hard coded, have to reach a certain amount of damage before the destroyed treads happen) One AT4 won't destroy a tank, hence the heavy stuff for one shot kills. LAT are for grouping shots on a tank to kill it

DeltaFart wrote:Your logic defies me jonny
Yeah the AT4 or LAW80 should stop a tanks movement, but its only by chance that the mechanics of the tank stop working(hard coded, have to reach a certain amount of damage before the destroyed treads happen) One AT4 won't destroy a tank, hence the heavy stuff for one shot kills. LAT are for grouping shots on a tank to kill it

A tank isnt a just a tank, there 1000's of different variation of a tank.

a SINGLE AT4 will critically damage a t55-t62, no doubt about it! although it wont comletely decapitate it like a 120APFSDS will, but it will more than likely kill the crew. After all, its what the AT4 was designed for.

Oh and by the way, i was meaning the british LAW 80 which can penetrate a whole load more armour than a at4 can!

The LAW 80's pretty hard core. In ARMA it can one hit a tank.

Yeah, not the ballistics of the rocket which decides the penetrating power of these rockets (unless of course it is because of the ballistics that you cannot hit but that is not what is being argued). These rockets, unlike the anti-tank sabot rounds, rely on explosive force rather than speed.

If only we had the damage system of ArmA! Than an AT4 would completly mess up any tank

[R-CON]nedlands1 wrote:Yeah, not the ballistics of the rocket which decides the penetrating power of these rockets (unless of course it is because of the ballistics that you cannot hit but that is not what is being argued). These rockets, unlike the anti-tank sabot rounds, rely on explosive force rather than speed.

That isnt the point, its correct yeah, but its fact at what i have said, a LAW 80 can penetrate quit e a lot of modern armour never mind 1st gen soviet MBT's.

...and the guy who basically repeated what i said, HENCE WHY I POSTED, it shouldnt take 2 hits to destroy certain AFV's etc. The at4-law 80 were not designed for taking out snipers, ever wondered why its caled a Anti, tank, rocket? Thus, if you guys want to make it as realistic as possible its changes like these which will have a big effect.

Agreed, T62 armor should be reduced to something much more realistic.

As far as killing APCs with LATs, I have never had a problem as long as there is someone with ammo nearby. Most APC drivers are too stupid or lazy to pull back and get repaired, and will gladly hang around to take another LAT to their armor. I don't think that the amount of damage that the APCs can sustain is unrealistic, given the fact that most of these APCs have been designed/upgraded with enemy LAT weapons in mind.

Thread title changed to "Unreal L-AT ballistics"